Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t RFC] tests: Add explicit test lists for CI use.

2016-10-06 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 09:31:32AM +0300, Petri Latvala wrote: > See tests/intel-ci/README for rationale and explanation. > > Signed-off-by: Petri Latvala > --- > > > The plans for CI are to use explicit test lists in the future, as laid > out in this commit. Comments, acks, nacks, flames, etc

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t RFC] tests: Add explicit test lists for CI use.

2016-10-06 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 07:51:46AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 09:31:32AM +0300, Petri Latvala wrote: > > See tests/intel-ci/README for rationale and explanation. > > A lot of those tests are garbage and not future proof making them > useless for regression testing. Includ

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t RFC] tests: Add explicit test lists for CI use.

2016-10-05 Thread Chris Wilson
On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 09:31:32AM +0300, Petri Latvala wrote: > See tests/intel-ci/README for rationale and explanation. A lot of those tests are garbage and not future proof making them useless for regression testing. Including them just adds noise and us ignoring the results. -Chris -- Chris

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t RFC] tests: Add explicit test lists for CI use.

2016-10-05 Thread Petri Latvala
See tests/intel-ci/README for rationale and explanation. Signed-off-by: Petri Latvala --- The plans for CI are to use explicit test lists in the future, as laid out in this commit. Comments, acks, nacks, flames, etc would be very welcome. The only list so far is a fattened version of the curre