Quoting Alejandro Piñeiro (2018-06-26 03:44:53) > On 25/06/18 17:59, Dylan Baker wrote: > > Quoting Alejandro Piñeiro (2018-06-23 04:26:33) > >> On 22/06/18 19:14, Dylan Baker wrote: > >>> Quoting Alejandro Piñeiro (2018-06-20 05:40:38) > >>>> So when executing shader tests, they will be executed with -glsl. This > >>>> is the force GLSL mode, that is only relevant if the shader test > >>>> includes SPIR-V shaders. > >>> I'm not sure I understand what you're doing. It looks like you're > >>> planning to > >>> build tests that can be run in either SPIRV or GLSL mode, that they can be > >>> forced into GLSL mode using a switch, or use SPIRV mode if available. Is > >>> that > >>> correct? > >> Yes. Perhaps the commit message is not really clear, as all the details > >> are included on the previous commit "shader_runner/spirv: support > >> loading SPIR-V shaders". On that commit we explain that we add a -glsl > >> option to shader_runner, that is mostly a debugging option. What this > >> commits adds is adding the -glsl option when running the tests in a > >> batch. With this series, the -glsl option would only make sense with the > >> ARB_gl_spirv tests we are adding. > >> > >> Do you think that I should update the commit message to be more clear? > >> > >> BR > >> > > My concern is that you could end up with two tests with the same name that > > aren't the same (I think), since the --glsl option won't change the name of > > the > > test. > > Right now, the idea behind the --glsl option is not getting two tests > from the same executable. The tests included with this series are > expected to run on SPIR-V mode. So for example, we would not add a new > entry on opengl.py/shader.py to run those tests twice. As mentioned it > is mostly a debug utility/sanity check, that was useful when we were > working on getting them passed, so we understand that will be still > useful on the future, for any other driver interested on support the > extension, or even for i965 again, if there is any future regression. > > Perhaps you are thinking that we plan to use that option, or similar, to > reuse tests from other extensions. What I called "borrowed tests" on the > RFC I sent some months ago. For that case, our plan would be generate > new tests to be placed under generated_tests. So in the case of reusing > tests from other extensions, we would still have two different base > tests (one for GLSL, other for SPIRV). > > BR
That sounds reasonable. My concern was that someone would see tests failing because they lacked spirv tools, and run with --glsl, then give that to a second person who did have spriv-tools, and see different results. Dylan
signature.asc
Description: signature
_______________________________________________ Piglit mailing list Piglit@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/piglit