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:9.356 / U:0.016 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site