On Sat, Oct 20, 2018 at 01:27:48PM +, Deepak Singh Rawat wrote:
>
> > Hi Deepak,
> >
> > Something to consider, with this approach we kind of break the
> > following behaviour:
> > "Only tests enabled as module parameters are run, if no test is
> > explicitly enabled then all of them are run"
> Hi Deepak,
>
> Something to consider, with this approach we kind of break the
> following behaviour:
> "Only tests enabled as module parameters are run, if no test is
> explicitly enabled then all of them are run"
>
> What I think we should do is have just one header where we put the
> selftes
On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 11:21 AM Alexandru-Cosmin Gheorghe
wrote:
>
> Hi Deepak,
>
> Something to consider, with this approach we kind of break the
> following behaviour:
> "Only tests enabled as module parameters are run, if no test is
> explicitly enabled then all of them are run"
>
> What I thi
Hi Deepak,
Something to consider, with this approach we kind of break the
following behaviour:
"Only tests enabled as module parameters are run, if no test is
explicitly enabled then all of them are run"
What I think we should do is have just one header where we put the
selftest(check_plane_stat
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 01:46:09PM -0700, Deepak Rawat wrote:
> > Selftest for drm damage helper iterator functions.
> >
> > Cc: Daniel Vetter
> > Cc: alexandru-cosmin.gheor...@arm.com
> > Signed-off-by: Deepak Rawat
> > Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter
> > Reviewed-by: Thomas Hellstrom
>
> I gues
On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 01:46:09PM -0700, Deepak Rawat wrote:
> Selftest for drm damage helper iterator functions.
>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter
> Cc: alexandru-cosmin.gheor...@arm.com
> Signed-off-by: Deepak Rawat
> Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter
> Reviewed-by: Thomas Hellstrom
I guess this needs your e
