On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 10:04:28AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 06:19:24PM -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > This is useful when 1 person is running all tests and other one is reading log willing
> > to know what tests passed and which failed. So tester is able to run all tests without
> > stop and send log to developer.
> >
> > v2: Rebased after igt_debug_warn_and_wait_for_key
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c | 20 +++++++++++++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> > index 24f5ca8..ce50cdd 100644
> > --- a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> > +++ b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> > @@ -316,11 +316,21 @@ static bool is_green(char *crc)
> >
> > static void assert_or_manual(bool condition, const char *expected)
> > {
> > - if (igt_interactive_debug)
> > - igt_info("Is %s?\n", expected);
> > - else
> > - igt_debug("%s\n", expected);
> > - igt_debug_wait_for_keypress("manual");
> > + char msg[50];
> > + char c;
> > +
> > + igt_debug("%s\n", expected);
> > +
> > + sprintf(msg, "Is %s [Y/n]? ", expected);
> > + c = igt_debug_warn_and_wait_for_key("manual", msg);
> > +
> > + if (c) {
> > + if (c == 'n' || c == 'N')
> > + igt_fail(-1);
> > + else
> > + igt_info("\n");
> > + }
>
> Imo it'd be better to move this check into the helper too. And then give
> it a name that makes it clear that it's a checkpoint for the user for
> manual testing. I don't have any good ideas, but maybe
> igt_interactive_debug_manual_check?
Maybe better igt_debug_manual_check for consistency with
igt_debug_wait_for_keypress.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
