I don't remember. I asked Ken about it when Marek updated a huge swath of tests to run concurrent and I swapped the default flag from non-concurrent to concurrent, but I don't remember all of the details.
Front buffer rendering and timer query were two cases where concurrent definitely wasn't safe. PS. I need to stop responding to emails from my phone. On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 04:36:27PM -0500, Ilia Mirkin wrote: > And how do you tell if a test is using front buffer rendering? Is that > the only situation, or are there others? > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Dylan Baker <baker.dyla...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Any tests that use front buffer rendering cannot be run concurrently. I > > think that's some other cases. > > > > On Nov 20, 2015 12:32, "Ilia Mirkin" <imir...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > >> > >> It looks like we're up to something like 1K non-concurrent piglit > >> tests... maybe more. Can someone who actually understands the issues > >> explain what makes a piglit test unreliable when run concurrently with > >> another test? Then we can go and enable concurrency on probably 75% of > >> the currently-marked-nonconcurrent tests. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> -ilia > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Piglit mailing list > >> Piglit@lists.freedesktop.org > >> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list Piglit@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit
