From:   Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.com>
To:     Isabella Basso <isabbasso@riseup.net>
Cc:     igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        KUnit Development <kunit-dev@googlegroups.com>,
        Magali Lemes <magalilemes00@gmail.com>,
        =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ma=EDra?= Canal <maira.canal@usp.br>,
        Daniel Latypov <dlatypov@google.com>, n@nfraprado.net,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        leandro.ribeiro@collabora.com,
        ML dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        David Gow <davidgow@google.com>,
        Tales Aparecida <tales.aparecida@gmail.com>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
        =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9?= Almeida <andrealmeid@riseup.net>,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com>,
        Trevor Woerner <twoerner@gmail.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mauro.chehab@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v2 3/4] lib/igt_kmod: add compatibility for KUnit
Date:   Fri, 10 Feb 2023 15:56:44 +0100
Message-ID: <7621786.lvqk35OSZv@jkrzyszt-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com>
Organization: Intel Technology Poland sp. z o.o. - ul. Slowackiego 173, 80-298 Gdansk - KRS 101882 - NIP 957-07-52-316
In-Reply-To: <66E07FE6-0FE1-4CDF-A346-CF23C7B9D073@riseup.net>
References: <20220829000920.38185-1-isabbasso@riseup.net> <2101392.KlZ2vcFHjT@jkrzyszt-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com> <66E07FE6-0FE1-4CDF-A346-CF23C7B9D073@riseup.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Precedence: bulk

Hi Isabella,

On Monday, 19 September 2022 22:55:44 CET Isabella Basso wrote:
> Hi, Janusz,
> 
> > Am 09/09/2022 um 12:18 PM schrieb Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzysztofik@linux.intel.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?

Thanks,
Janusz