From: Claude Code Review Bot <claude-review@example.com>
To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com
Subject: Claude review: drm/tests: Mark slow tests as slow
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2026 15:13:20 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <review-patch1-20260224110310.1854608-1-mripard@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260224110310.1854608-1-mripard@kernel.org>
Patch Review
**Reviewed files:**
- `drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/tests/tests_basic.c` — two changes
- `drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_buddy_test.c` — one change
All three changes are identical in nature: `KUNIT_CASE(...)` → `KUNIT_CASE_SLOW(...)`.
**scheduler/tests/tests_basic.c:**
```c
- KUNIT_CASE(drm_sched_change_priority),
+ KUNIT_CASE_SLOW(drm_sched_change_priority),
```
```c
- KUNIT_CASE(drm_sched_test_credits),
+ KUNIT_CASE_SLOW(drm_sched_test_credits),
```
Both are reasonable candidates. `drm_sched_change_priority` uses `usleep_range` polling loops and `drm_sched_test_credits` calls `drm_mock_sched_job_wait_finished(job, HZ)` which waits up to 1 second by design, so it can plausibly cross the threshold.
**tests/drm_buddy_test.c:**
```c
- KUNIT_CASE(drm_test_buddy_fragmentation_performance),
+ KUNIT_CASE_SLOW(drm_test_buddy_fragmentation_performance),
```
A performance/stress test is a natural candidate for the slow annotation.
**Minor observation:** The commit message says tests "cross the 1s execution time threshold" but doesn't mention which specific tests or on what hardware. This is fine for a patch of this scope, but if reviewers want reproducibility context, it could be worth noting whether these were measured on a particular CI system. This is not a blocker.
**Verdict:** Patch looks good.
Reviewed-by: AI Review <ai@review>
---
Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-27 5:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-24 11:03 [PATCH] drm/tests: Mark slow tests as slow Maxime Ripard
2026-02-24 11:12 ` Thomas Zimmermann
2026-02-24 11:43 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-02-24 12:29 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2026-02-24 12:44 ` Philipp Stanner
2026-02-24 12:49 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2026-02-26 10:56 ` Maxime Ripard
2026-02-26 12:42 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2026-02-26 12:48 ` Philipp Stanner
2026-02-26 13:02 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2026-02-26 13:17 ` Philipp Stanner
2026-02-26 13:23 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2026-02-24 13:07 ` Arunpravin Paneer Selvam
2026-02-27 5:13 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-02-27 5:13 ` Claude Code Review Bot [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=review-patch1-20260224110310.1854608-1-mripard@kernel.org \
--to=claude-review@example.com \
--cc=dri-devel-reviews@example.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox