On 21 December 2017 at 09:26, Tapani Pälli <tapani.pa...@intel.com> wrote: > > On 12/18/2017 04:37 PM, Emil Velikov wrote: >> >> On 13 December 2017 at 12:54, Tapani Pälli <tapani.pa...@intel.com> wrote: >> >>>> The test doesn't care how well eglCopyBuffers itself works - aim it to >>>> illustrate the buggy validation in Mesa. >>>> Hence the wait + pixmap readback are not really needed. >>>> >>>> Admittedly the test name is quite misleading as-is - I'm short on >>>> alternatives though :-( >>> >>> >>> >>> OK, yeah that is fine. It's not far from 'complete test' though but such >>> athing can be also added later. >>> >> Agreed. Would you have any additional suggestions on this patch? >> Input on the nitpicks (originally put by yours truly) would be >> appreciated: >> >> - suggestions for test name and category? > > > I guess "tests/bugs" is for this kind of specific misc issues but I think > egl and copybuffers is fine assuming it can be expanded later with the pixel > reading and then name shouldn't be an issue. > >> - should we bother at all with piglit_egl_get_default_display(EGL_NONE) > > > No opinion here > >> - yay X11+DRI3 crashes somewhere in the xshmfence code... DRI2 works >> fine. >> > > This would be good to figure out .. I cannot spot why it would happen though > :/ > Tapani, others,
Anyone care to share a r-b on this patch? Thanks Emil _______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list Piglit@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
