On Friday, 10 February 2023 17:55:34 CET Isabella Basso wrote:
Am 2023-02-10 um 11:56 AM schrieb Janusz Krzysztofik firstname.lastname@example.org:
On Monday, 19 September 2022 22:55:44 CET Isabella Basso wrote:
Am 09/09/2022 um 12:18 PM schrieb Janusz Krzysztofik email@example.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?
I’ve already handled most common cases but I still have to address Chehab’s comments — specifically in what concerns crashes. I’ve been doing most of the development by myself as GSoC has ended so I’m taking my time on this.
My most up-to-date work is available at , so if you have any suggestions as to what might be done I’d love to hear them before sending out v3 to the mailing list.
Thanks for pointing me to that merge request, it's great to know there is some progress. I've just had a look and I can see you are now working on some comments from Maria and Tales. I've requested to be notified on new posts to that merge request so I hope to review your next update when available.
As soon as you resolve issues and feel comfortable with sharing your work, please submit your changes to the igt-dev list to give them a try on our CI system.