On 5/10/22 9:39 PM, Jessica Zhang wrote:
On 5/10/2022 7:13 AM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
+igt@kms_atomic_interruptible@legacy-setmode@pipe-a-edp-1
+igt@kms_atomic_interruptible@atomic-setmode@pipe-a-edp-1
+igt@kms_atomic_interruptible@legacy-dpms@pipe-a-edp-1
+igt@kms_atomic_interruptible@legacy-pageflip@pipe-a-edp-1
+igt@kms_atomic_interruptible@legacy-cursor@pipe-a-edp-1
+igt@kms_atomic_interruptible@universal-setplane-primary@pipe-a-edp-1
+igt@kms_atomic_interruptible@universal-setplane-cursor@pipe-a-edp-1
I see that there are some KMS subtests/tests are missing such as
kms_atomic_transition -- are they unstable across all boards?
From what I've seen, kms_atomic_transition is unstable only on Trogdor,
but has stable results on other boards.
I don't know of a good reason for not having the tests in this list.
Developers can follow the instructions at "How to expand coverage" to
add tests if the driver can consistently pass (or fail) them.
There is ongoing work to have a test runner that will better handle
flaky tests, which will make it possible to expand the list without
having to resort to per-soc test lists.
+igt@kms_addfb_basic@size-max,pass
+igt@kms_addfb_basic@too-wide,pass
+igt@kms_addfb_basic@too-high,dmesg-warn
For test results on Trogdor, is is possible to have them be
success/fail/skip only?
Results such as dmesg-warn/dmesg-fail are igt_runner specific and
because there isn't support for igt_runner on ChromeOS, they will be
difficult to replicate and debug.
As Rob said later, it's probably better to drop that distinction. Maybe
at some future point we will want to track expected kmsg output but I
think there are lots of work to do before that makes sense.
Will do that in a v3.
+igt@kms_universal_plane@universal-plane-pipe-a-functional,skip
+igt@kms_universal_plane@disable-primary-vs-flip-pipe-a,pass
+igt@kms_universal_plane@disable-primary-vs-flip-pipe-b,fail
We could probably skip checking the results for kms_universal_plane on
Trogdor for now, since this is a test affected by the hack regression.
There is an IGT patch in the works for fixing the
disable-primary-vs-flip-pipe-b failure, so it should be updated pretty
soon too.
So, how this should work is for the patch that fixes that bug to update
also the expectation files (see "How to update test expectations" in the
docs). In this case though, the fix is likely to land before this patch,
so I will just update the expectations once I rebase and the fix is
brought into my branch.
Thanks for the feedback!
Tomeu
