[PATCH intel-gpu-tools 00/10] Upgrade module configuration and packaging (reposted to .cc)

[Daniel Vetter]

On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 02:41, Gaetan Nadon <memsize at videotron.ca> wrote:
> On 12-01-04 09:38 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 15:33, Gaetan Nadon <memsize at videotron.ca> wrote:
>>> On 12-01-04 04:52 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>>> While I have the attention of someone versed in buildsystem-fu:
>>>> intel-gpu-tools also contains a set of tests for the i915 kernel module
>>>> (and the libdrm interface for it). Currently we run them with
>>>>
>>>> $ make test
>>>>
>>>> by abusing the automake test rig. Is this ok or is there a better way to
>>>> do something like this?
>>> I would think so, there is support in Automake to hook test cases and in
>>> util-macros to test for things like glib and provide configure option.
>>> It is used by several modules by invoking 'make check'. I'll look into
>>> that, but I might ask a few questions as I am not familiar with video
>>> drivers.
>> Originally we've abused make check, but that turned out to be a bad
>> idea because make distcheck automatically runs that. And the tests
>> check the kernel and not intel-gpu-tools itself, so that didn't make
>> much sense. Hence we added make test with a quick hack to run make
>> check with a different set of tests (see the test: target in
>> tests/Makefile.am).
> This makes the intel-gpu-tools package confusing. It is supposed to be
> "tools",
> not a hardware test suite. I don't really see a way around this.
>> One thing I'm wondering is whether we could easily ship these tests in
>> some form, so that users could run them from the distro package
>> instead of grabbing the sources.
> Make it clear what it is: a new "intel-gpu-tests" package  which depends
> on intel-gpu-tools. Some executable installed in BINDIR runs test cases
> installed in DATADIR. You need to provide ways to select test cases,
> instructions on how to report bugs with meaningful data, etc...
>
> The executable must be smart enough to not run anything on non-Intel
> hardware or wrong kernel, etc... This would put your test suite in the
> public domain and would be run by anyone. Would it be useful or just
> generate more work? Would distros be willing to install this? They are
> the ones who would initially get the bug reports from their users.
>
> X.Org has an X Test Suite in a git repo to test the protocols.
> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/test/xts/tree/README
>
> I did try one of the tools on my computer. The windows started shaking
> and the window manager eventually fell off the monitor, never to be seen
> again. Needless to say, I am not willing to try any test case :-(

I think you've convinced me ;-) At least for the foreseeable future,
the current setup seems to be good enough.

Thanks a lot for your explanations & patches.

Cheers, Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch - +41 (0) 79 364 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch