[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7621786.lvqk35OSZv@jkrzyszt-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 15:56:44 +0100
From: Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzysztofik@...ux.intel.com>
To: Isabella Basso <isabbasso@...eup.net>
Cc: igt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
KUnit Development <kunit-dev@...glegroups.com>,
Magali Lemes <magalilemes00@...il.com>,
Maíra Canal <maira.canal@....br>,
Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@...gle.com>, n@...aprado.net,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
leandro.ribeiro@...labora.com,
ML dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
Tales Aparecida <tales.aparecida@...il.com>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
André Almeida <andrealmeid@...eup.net>,
Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
Trevor Woerner <twoerner@...il.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mauro.chehab@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v2 3/4] lib/igt_kmod: add compatibility for KUnit
Hi Isabella,
On Monday, 19 September 2022 22:55:44 CET Isabella Basso wrote:
> Hi, Janusz,
>
> > Am 09/09/2022 um 12:18 PM schrieb Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzysztofik@...ux.intel.com>:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > Anyway, related to my comment about naming that function a parser, I think the
> > best approach would be for that parser to return a generic set of results from
> > kunit execution, then we could feed that data into an IGT specific handler
> > that would convert them to IGT results (SUCCESS, FAIL, or SKIP) as if returned
> > by a set of IGT dynamic subtests.
>
> That sounds like a good idea to me, I might take some extra time before v3 to
> do that, though.
Were you able to make any progress? Do you need any help?
Thanks,
Janusz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists