On 17 September 2015 at 13:43, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 01:16:18PM +0100, Thomas Wood wrote: >> On 17 September 2015 at 13:09, Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 12:42:44PM +0100, Thomas Wood wrote: >> >> Add a script to take a piglit results file and create a list of tests >> >> that ran in under 60 seconds. This list can be used by the --test-list >> >> option of piglit. >> > >> > And passed? >> >> Any status except "incomplete", which normally means a reboot was >> required. It might also be worth noting that tests skipped on one >> platform may not skip on another, so the output only really applies to >> the platform the results were initially produced on. > > My point is that the timing can only be expected to be consistent for a > pass. A failure may be quick, but success may take a few hours. I think including failed tests depends on whether the "quick" run should be able to detect fixes from previous runs. Perhaps an option to exclude anything other than successful tests might be useful. There is also the timeout mechanism in piglit/igt that will prevent any test from running for more than 10 minutes. > -Chris > > -- > Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
