lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Mar]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCHv4 00/11] Implement V4L2_BUF_FLAG_NO_CACHE_* flags
On (20/03/06 15:18), Hans Verkuil wrote:
[..]
> As mentioned in my v4 review I found a serious bug when testing with
> v4l2-compliance. That meant that this series was not tested properly,
> which is a requirement for something that touches the core framework.

I run tests locally on my board, but the scenarios are rather limited.

> I've posted an RFC patch with my v4l-utils changes (assumes you've run
> 'make sync-with-kernel' first), but that's just very basic testing. You
> can use it as your starting point.

Thanks. I'll try to use it as a starting point and run more "diverse"
tests cases.

> It needs to be expanded to test the various combinations of flags and
> capabilities. I don't think there is a reliable way of actually testing
> the cache hint functionality, so that can be skipped, but the compliance
> test should at least test the basic behavior depending on whether or not
> the cache hints capability is set.

I'll take a look.

> I also would like to see a patch adding cache hint support to an existing
> driver (more than one if possible) and the compliance output when tested
> against that driver.

Need to talk to Tomasz and Pawel first.

> You should also test with the test-media script in contrib/test: run as
> 'sudo test-media mc' to test with all the virtual drivers. If it all passes,
> then that's a good indication that there are at least no regressions.

OK, let me try.

-ss

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-03-07 09:10    [W:0.192 / U:3.772 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site