Cycles render tests: Add the option to test with OSL enabled #124601

Merged
Sergey Sharybin merged 64 commits from Alaska/blender:enable-osl-tests into main 2024-08-14 17:01:07 +02:00
Member

This commit adds a new cmake variable WITH_CYCLES_TEST_OSL
that runs every Cycles test a second time with OSL enabled.

At the moment only CPU OSL is enabled. There are plans to enable
OptiX OSL in the future when stability issues with OptiX OSL
have been resolved.

Some render tests have been blocked from running until we can figure
out a fix. The most notiable being all the Pricincipled BSDF tests
as some of them are failing due to noise differences.


TODO/Questions:

  • Enable by default on build bot?
    • Currently enabled
  • Enable OSL tests by default for everyone?
    • Risks OSL being the reference image when a developer updates tests with BLENDER_TEST_UPDATE=1 ctest..., when ideally SVM should be the reference. But this could be resolved by scheduling OSL tests first, then SVM second. And it shouldn't matter as OSL and SVM should match.
    • Sergey recommends leaving off by default.
  • Create a proper blocklist for failing tests after investigating why each test fails, and fixing them when possible.
    • Alaska has already investigated a lot of cases and submitted pull requests for the ones they could fix.
    • There are some more complex cases (noise in the Principled BSDF tests) that needs a deeper investigation. These tests can be temporarily disabled and an investigation and fix can be submitted later.
  • Test on build bot, see if anything is failing on other platforms
  • Backport to 4.2 LTS to allow for more thorough testing there? There are merge conflicts due to other changes like Use blocklist name for blocked tests and Enable MNEE tests on Metal. Should those also be backported? Or should I create a 4.2 version of just this PR? - Up to Philipp to decide
  • General code review

Ref #123012

This commit adds a new cmake variable `WITH_CYCLES_TEST_OSL` that runs every Cycles test a second time with OSL enabled. At the moment only CPU OSL is enabled. There are plans to enable OptiX OSL in the future when stability issues with OptiX OSL have been resolved. Some render tests have been blocked from running until we can figure out a fix. The most notiable being all the Pricincipled BSDF tests as some of them are failing due to noise differences. --- TODO/Questions: - [x] Enable by default on build bot? - Currently enabled - [x] Enable OSL tests by default for everyone? - Risks OSL being the reference image when a developer updates tests with `BLENDER_TEST_UPDATE=1 ctest...`, when ideally SVM should be the reference. But this could be resolved by scheduling OSL tests first, then SVM second. And it shouldn't matter as OSL and SVM should match. - Sergey recommends leaving off by default. - [x] Create a proper blocklist for failing tests after investigating why each test fails, and fixing them when possible. - Alaska has already investigated a lot of cases and submitted pull requests for the ones they could fix. - There are some more complex cases (noise in the Principled BSDF tests) that needs a deeper investigation. These tests can be temporarily disabled and an investigation and fix can be submitted later. - [x] Test on build bot, see if anything is failing on other platforms - [x] Backport to 4.2 LTS to allow for more thorough testing there? There are merge conflicts due to other changes like `Use blocklist name for blocked tests` and `Enable MNEE tests on Metal`. Should those also be backported? Or should I create a 4.2 version of just this PR? - Up to Philipp to decide - [x] General code review Ref #123012
Alaska added 1 commit 2024-07-12 14:01:36 +02:00
Alaska added this to the Render & Cycles project 2024-07-12 14:01:39 +02:00
Alaska added 2 commits 2024-07-12 14:52:06 +02:00
Alaska added 3 commits 2024-07-12 15:53:41 +02:00
Alaska added 3 commits 2024-07-12 16:39:48 +02:00
Alaska force-pushed enable-osl-tests from 5d8f82c912 to f8a4d702d8 2024-07-13 07:22:18 +02:00 Compare
Alaska added 5 commits 2024-07-13 18:45:40 +02:00
Alaska added 3 commits 2024-07-15 06:00:29 +02:00
Alaska added 1 commit 2024-07-15 07:16:18 +02:00
Alaska added 4 commits 2024-07-17 07:45:03 +02:00
Change to "Blocklist" on my new lists to conform with a upcoming change.
Change BLOCKLIST_OSL_TESTS to BLOCKLIST_EXPLICIT_OSL_TESTS
Alaska added 4 commits 2024-07-17 09:44:35 +02:00
Author
Member

@Sergey and @weizhen can I get your input on some things?

  • I would like to target supporting CPU and OptiX OSL in these tests, but more tests than expected need to be blocked in OptiX OSL due to issues like #122779.
    • Would you like me to strive for OptiX OSL support, and just block every OptiX OSL test that's failing with comments explaining why? Or should I leave OptiX OSL disabled and we can enable OptiX OSL once those issues are fixed?
  • A few tests are failing due to noise differences and I'm not sure how to fix them. (See Failing noise tests image below)
    • Every single one of these tests are failing because of noise differences with shader mixing/layering in the Principled BSDF in OSL. With the exception of blackbody which I assume is failing because OSL uses a LUT that's slightly different from the SVM implementation of the node.
      • How would you like these handled? Block them? Adjust noise thresholds? Something else?

Note: If you run this locally you will notice there are three other tests I haven't blocked that are failing. I have submitted a PR that fixes two of them: !124673

The other is the īmage_log_osl test. The īmage_log_osl test is expected to be different between OSL and SVM. So there are OSL and SVM variants of this test. The issue is that the OSL variant doesn't have OSL turned on, and so the test was wrong. This pull request just exposes that.

Has been fixed in main.

@Sergey and @weizhen can I get your input on some things? - I would like to target supporting CPU and OptiX OSL in these tests, but more tests than expected need to be blocked in OptiX OSL due to issues like #122779. - Would you like me to strive for OptiX OSL support, and just block every OptiX OSL test that's failing with comments explaining why? Or should I leave OptiX OSL disabled and we can enable OptiX OSL once those issues are fixed? - A few tests are failing due to noise differences and I'm not sure how to fix them. (See `Failing noise tests` image below) - Every single one of these tests are failing because of noise differences with shader mixing/layering in the Principled BSDF in OSL. With the exception of blackbody which I assume is failing because OSL uses a LUT that's slightly different from the SVM implementation of the node. - How would you like these handled? Block them? Adjust noise thresholds? Something else? Note: If you run this locally you will notice there are three other tests I haven't blocked that are failing. I have submitted a PR that fixes two of them: !124673 ~~The other is the `īmage_log_osl` test. The `īmage_log_osl` test is expected to be different between OSL and SVM. So there are OSL and SVM variants of this test. The issue is that the OSL variant doesn't have OSL turned on, and so the test was wrong. This pull request just exposes that.~~ Has been fixed in main.

I would suggest narrowing the scope of the first step. Surely ideally all permutations will be tested, especially on the CI/CD. Adding WITH_CYCLES_TEST_OSL disabled by default which will enable rendering all tests with OSL will be the good first step.

On the implementation level it is quite strange to have render-engine-specific code in a generic base class. More ideally would be to subclass render_report.Report in cycles_render_tests.py and implement all specific logic as method overrides.

Image tests will be too different between OSL and SVN due to the difference in image sampling. But the rest of the files is not immediately clear to me why they are so different.

I would suggest narrowing the scope of the first step. Surely ideally all permutations will be tested, especially on the CI/CD. Adding `WITH_CYCLES_TEST_OSL` disabled by default which will enable rendering all tests with OSL will be the good first step. On the implementation level it is quite strange to have render-engine-specific code in a generic base class. More ideally would be to subclass `render_report.Report` in `cycles_render_tests.py` and implement all specific logic as method overrides. Image tests will be too different between OSL and SVN due to the difference in image sampling. But the rest of the files is not immediately clear to me why they are so different.
Alaska added 2 commits 2024-07-17 14:17:17 +02:00
Sergey Sharybin reviewed 2024-07-17 14:43:24 +02:00
@ -702,6 +702,22 @@ if(WITH_CYCLES OR WITH_GPU_RENDER_TESTS)
-blacklist ${_cycles_blacklist}
)
if(WITH_CYCLES_TEST_OSL AND WITH_CYCLES_OSL)

Will this create cycles_osl_osl test, since we already have osl folder?

Will this create `cycles_osl_osl` test, since we already have osl folder?
Author
Member

You mean the commandline output from make test? It's cycles_osl_cpu_osl

You mean the commandline output from `make test`? It's `cycles_osl_cpu_osl`

Ah indeed. But is it just cycles_osl_cpu_osl, or do we have both cycles_osl_cpu_osl and cycles_osl_cpu with this change?

Ah indeed. But is it just `cycles_osl_cpu_osl`, or do we have both `cycles_osl_cpu_osl` and `cycles_osl_cpu` with this change?
Author
Member

It creates both. Would you like me to change it so the tests in the OSL folder to only run if WITH_CYCLES_TEST_OSL is enabled?

It creates both. Would you like me to change it so the tests in the OSL folder to only run if `WITH_CYCLES_TEST_OSL` is enabled?

We could make it so:

  • If WITH_CYCLES_TEST_OSL=OFF then we add cycles_osl_cpu as we do it now (so nothing changes compared to the state prior to this PR, for neither test coverage, nor for people).
  • If WITH_CYCLES_TEST_OSL=ON then we add cycles_osl_cpu_osl (and potentially cycles_osl_optix_osl), so that we test everything supported on OSL, at a cost of potentially longer test run times).

Sounds a bit convoluted, but it avoids running essentially the same test twice, and also keeps it so the basics of OSL are always tested, even by people who don't necessarily want to test all device/shading models permutations.

How does this sound to you?

We could make it so: - If `WITH_CYCLES_TEST_OSL=OFF` then we add `cycles_osl_cpu` as we do it now (so nothing changes compared to the state prior to this PR, for neither test coverage, nor for people). - If `WITH_CYCLES_TEST_OSL=ON` then we add `cycles_osl_cpu_osl` (and potentially `cycles_osl_optix_osl`), so that we test everything supported on OSL, at a cost of potentially longer test run times). Sounds a bit convoluted, but it avoids running essentially the same test twice, and also keeps it so the basics of OSL are always tested, even by people who don't necessarily want to test all device/shading models permutations. How does this sound to you?
Alaska marked this conversation as resolved

For the buildbot-only configurations I've just landed #124892 which makes it much easier to tweak CMake options which we want to have on the buildbot but not on a local configurations.

For the buildbot-only configurations I've just landed #124892 which makes it much easier to tweak CMake options which we want to have on the buildbot but not on a local configurations.
Author
Member

So if we want OSL tests enabled by default on the build bot, I should just add set(WITH_CYCLES_TEST_OSL ON CACHE BOOL "" FORCE) to /build_files/cmake/config/blender_release.cmake?

And do you want this enabled by default on the build bot in this first iteration?

So if we want OSL tests enabled by default on the build bot, I should just add `set(WITH_CYCLES_TEST_OSL ON CACHE BOOL "" FORCE)` to `/build_files/cmake/config/blender_release.cmake`? And do you want this enabled by default on the build bot in this first iteration?

No, you add them to build_files/buildbot/config/blender_{liinux,macos,windows}.cmake. Similarly to the set(WITH_DOC_MANPAGE OFF CACHE BOOL "" FORCE).
The blender_release.cmake is what make release will use, and what buildbot is basing its configuration on, with ability override some things.

For enabling by default on buildbot -- it depends. If we can do things to pass quickly, then we might as well. One way forward with this would be to have somewhat longer block-list than it will be in ideal world.
If there are scenes where we need to have a more dedicated look then i'm totally open for having it as a disabled-for-now but make-it-easy-to-look-into option.

No, you add them to `build_files/buildbot/config/blender_{liinux,macos,windows}.cmake`. Similarly to the `set(WITH_DOC_MANPAGE OFF CACHE BOOL "" FORCE)`. The `blender_release.cmake` is what `make release` will use, and what buildbot is basing its configuration on, with ability override some things. For enabling by default on buildbot -- it depends. If we can do things to pass quickly, then we might as well. One way forward with this would be to have somewhat longer block-list than it will be in ideal world. If there are scenes where we need to have a more dedicated look then i'm totally open for having it as a disabled-for-now but make-it-easy-to-look-into option.
Author
Member
  • I've limited OSL tests to one run throughout the entire test run.
  • I've enabled these tests on the build bot.
  • To make sure tests pass on the build bot, I've blocked every test that's failing with notes on why they were failing.
    • This blocking is a bit "wide" (E.g. Using render_passes.*.blend and principled.*.blend in the block list when only a few tests that match that expression are failing). But it means people can interate in those areas and not be afraid of Cycles OSL suddenly reporting a failure.

Feel free to ask the build bot to run these tests. I've primarily been testing on ARM macOS and there may be more failing tests I missed on other platforms.

- I've limited OSL tests to one run throughout the entire test run. - I've enabled these tests on the build bot. - To make sure tests pass on the build bot, I've blocked every test that's failing with notes on why they were failing. - This blocking is a bit "wide" (E.g. Using `render_passes.*.blend` and `principled.*.blend` in the block list when only a few tests that match that expression are failing). But it means people can interate in those areas and not be afraid of Cycles OSL suddenly reporting a failure. Feel free to ask the build bot to run these tests. I've primarily been testing on ARM macOS and there may be more failing tests I missed on other platforms.
Alaska added 8 commits 2024-07-17 17:35:55 +02:00
Alaska reviewed 2024-07-17 17:38:25 +02:00
Alaska added 1 commit 2024-07-17 17:43:37 +02:00
Alaska added 2 commits 2024-07-17 18:12:55 +02:00
Alaska added 1 commit 2024-07-18 05:42:00 +02:00
Alaska added 4 commits 2024-07-18 08:29:32 +02:00
Alaska changed title from WIP: Add the option to test with OSL enabled in Cycles render tests to Add the option to test with OSL enabled in Cycles render tests 2024-07-18 18:10:52 +02:00
Alaska added 2 commits 2024-07-18 18:10:55 +02:00
Alaska requested review from Sergey Sharybin 2024-07-18 18:11:05 +02:00
Alaska requested review from Weizhen Huang 2024-07-18 18:11:06 +02:00
Alaska added 2 commits 2024-07-20 07:02:09 +02:00
Alaska changed title from Add the option to test with OSL enabled in Cycles render tests to Cycles render tests: Add the option to test with OSL enabled 2024-07-20 07:02:12 +02:00
Alaska added 2 commits 2024-07-24 14:18:58 +02:00
Alaska added 2 commits 2024-07-24 15:30:49 +02:00
Remove blackbody from blocklist and increase noise threshold instead
Some checks failed
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-lint Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-linux-x86_64 Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-darwin-arm64 Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-darwin-x86_64 Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-windows-amd64 Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-coordinator Build done.
59f9943af8
Member

@blender-bot build

@blender-bot build
Alaska added 2 commits 2024-07-24 17:02:38 +02:00
Alaska added 2 commits 2024-07-25 06:42:46 +02:00
Clarify some code comments
All checks were successful
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-lint Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-linux-x86_64 Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-darwin-x86_64 Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-windows-amd64 Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-darwin-arm64 Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-coordinator Build done.
2d5049d17e

@blender-bot build

@blender-bot build
Alaska added 2 commits 2024-07-26 12:24:03 +02:00
Author
Member

Just to recap the current state of this PR.

  • The code changes to begin testing OSL on the CPU regularly is setup.
  • OptiX OSL testing is currently disabled due to bugs on that platform, and can be re-investigated once those are fixed.
  • Failing tests have been identified, and different courses of action have been taken for each:
    • Expected differences (E.g. Image differences) - Added to a block list
    • Simple Unexpected differences (E.g. UV difference) - I have fixed as many as I could in seperate pull requests.
    • Complex Unexpected differences (E.g. Noise in Principled BSDF tests) - Added to the blocklist to be investigated later.

Open questions:

  • Should we fix the failing Principled BSDF tests before committing this PR? Or leave them in the blocklist and investigate it later?
  • Should the OSL tests be scheduled before the SVM tests to avoid OSL becoming a reference image? This will only have an impact on tests that subtly differ when using OSL (at the moment these are the Blackbody and one of the microfacet hair tests)
  • Backport to 4.2 LTS to allow for more thorough testing there? There are merge conflicts due to other changes like Use blocklist name for blocked tests and Enable MNEE tests on Metal. Should those also be backported? Or should I create a 4.2 version of this PR?
Just to recap the current state of this PR. - The code changes to begin testing OSL on the CPU regularly is setup. - OptiX OSL testing is currently disabled due to bugs on that platform, and can be re-investigated once those are fixed. - Failing tests have been identified, and different courses of action have been taken for each: - Expected differences (E.g. Image differences) - Added to a block list - Simple Unexpected differences (E.g. UV difference) - I have fixed as many as I could in seperate pull requests. - Complex Unexpected differences (E.g. Noise in Principled BSDF tests) - Added to the blocklist to be investigated later. Open questions: - Should we fix the failing Principled BSDF tests before committing this PR? Or leave them in the blocklist and investigate it later? - Should the OSL tests be scheduled before the SVM tests to avoid OSL becoming a reference image? This will only have an impact on tests that subtly differ when using OSL (at the moment these are the Blackbody and one of the microfacet hair tests) > - [ ] Backport to 4.2 LTS to allow for more thorough testing there? There are merge conflicts due to other changes like `Use blocklist name for blocked tests` and `Enable MNEE tests on Metal`. Should those also be backported? Or should I create a 4.2 version of this PR?
Sergey Sharybin reviewed 2024-08-07 12:10:57 +02:00
Sergey Sharybin left a comment
Owner

Should we fix the failing Principled BSDF tests before committing this PR? Or leave them in the blocklist and investigate it later?

Leave them in the blocklist for now, re-iterate later.
We should try to keep scoping narrow, and look into discovered issues as a follow-up.

Should the OSL tests be scheduled before the SVM tests to avoid OSL becoming a reference image?

I don't really think so. It is not different from the metal tests running after CPU i.e.
When I update reference image i explicitly specify the test with the device name in it to avoid the exact issue you've described. I think others do the same.

We can update the report template to explicitly include device type there, for easier copy-paste.

If you can update the PR against the latest main, I think it will be ready to land. From reading the code I can't spot stoppers (but hasn't been able to test it locally yet, but I can't imagine anything big will be discovered then).

> Should we fix the failing Principled BSDF tests before committing this PR? Or leave them in the blocklist and investigate it later? Leave them in the blocklist for now, re-iterate later. We should try to keep scoping narrow, and look into discovered issues as a follow-up. > Should the OSL tests be scheduled before the SVM tests to avoid OSL becoming a reference image? I don't really think so. It is not different from the metal tests running after CPU i.e. When I update reference image i explicitly specify the test with the device name in it to avoid the exact issue you've described. I think others do the same. We can update the report template to explicitly include device type there, for easier copy-paste. If you can update the PR against the latest `main`, I think it will be ready to land. From reading the code I can't spot stoppers (but hasn't been able to test it locally yet, but I can't imagine anything big will be discovered then).
@ -708,0 +721,4 @@
-testdir "${TEST_SRC_DIR}/render/${render_test}"
-outdir "${TEST_OUT_DIR}/cycles_osl"
-device ${_cycles_device}
-blocklist ""

Can we just skip the -blocklist argument?

Can we just skip the `-blocklist` argument?
Author
Member

Simply removing results in errors like

  File "cycles_render_tests.py", line 219, in main
    if device != 'CPU' or 'OSL' in args.blocklist:
                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
TypeError: argument of type 'NoneType' is not iterable

This can probably be fixed by adjusting parser.add_argument("-blocklist", nargs="*"), but I haven't looked into yet. I'll test it in a few hours.

Simply removing results in errors like ``` File "cycles_render_tests.py", line 219, in main if device != 'CPU' or 'OSL' in args.blocklist: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ TypeError: argument of type 'NoneType' is not iterable ``` This can probably be fixed by adjusting `parser.add_argument("-blocklist", nargs="*")`, but I haven't looked into yet. I'll test it in a few hours.

Ah, good point. I think parser.add_argument("-blocklist", nargs="*", default=[]) would do the trick.

Ah, good point. I think `parser.add_argument("-blocklist", nargs="*", default=[])` would do the trick.
Author
Member

Was right in the middle of running the test suite to make sure it worked.

Was right in the middle of running the test suite to make sure it worked.
Alaska marked this conversation as resolved
@ -23,3 +24,3 @@
BLOCKLIST_OSL = [
BLOCKLIST_EXPLICIT_OSL = [
# OSL only supported on CPU.

The comment needs to be updated to reflect nowadays realities. Maybe just remove it.

I'd also suggest adding some comment around BLOCKLIST_OSL and BLOCKLIST_EXPLICIT_OSL:

# Block list that disables OSL specific tests for configurations that do not support OSL backend.
BLOCKLIST_EXPLICIT_OSL = [...]

# Block list for tests that are enforced to render with OSL by the test to ensure match between SVM and OSL.
BLOCKLIST_OSL = [...]
The comment needs to be updated to reflect nowadays realities. Maybe just remove it. I'd also suggest adding some comment around `BLOCKLIST_OSL` and `BLOCKLIST_EXPLICIT_OSL`: ``` # Block list that disables OSL specific tests for configurations that do not support OSL backend. BLOCKLIST_EXPLICIT_OSL = [...] # Block list for tests that are enforced to render with OSL by the test to ensure match between SVM and OSL. BLOCKLIST_OSL = [...] ```
Alaska marked this conversation as resolved
Alaska added 2 commits 2024-08-07 12:46:49 +02:00
Alaska added 1 commit 2024-08-07 14:47:32 +02:00
Alaska added 2 commits 2024-08-08 02:51:38 +02:00
Remove T49936 from OSL blocklist after fix from Lukas
All checks were successful
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-linux-x86_64 Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-lint Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-darwin-x86_64 Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-darwin-arm64 Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-windows-amd64 Build done.
buildbot/vexp-code-patch-coordinator Build done.
2d9aab575e

@blender-bot build

@blender-bot build
Sergey Sharybin approved these changes 2024-08-14 16:39:11 +02:00

Thanks for the updates. I'll wait for the tests to officially finish, and land the change.

It adds abut 40sec (on Linux) time to tests, but all things considered I think this is a good trade-off.

For the 4.2, the Use blocklist name for blocked tests seems fine to port. The Enable MNEE tests on Metal i am not fully sure what it is about, can't see an exact commit. Does it require some change that i not in 4.2 yet?

Thanks for the updates. I'll wait for the tests to officially finish, and land the change. It adds abut 40sec (on Linux) time to tests, but all things considered I think this is a good trade-off. For the 4.2, the `Use blocklist name for blocked tests` seems fine to port. The `Enable MNEE tests on Metal` i am not fully sure what it is about, can't see an exact commit. Does it require some change that i not in 4.2 yet?
Sergey Sharybin merged commit 1330d0ddda into main 2024-08-14 17:01:07 +02:00
Sergey Sharybin deleted branch enable-osl-tests 2024-08-14 17:01:11 +02:00
Author
Member

For the 4.2, the Use blocklist name for blocked tests seems fine to port. The Enable MNEE tests on Metal i am not fully sure what it is about, can't see an exact commit. Does it require some change that i not in 4.2 yet?

I don't know the full list of changes that need to be backported to avoid merge conflicts. All I remember is what I had to deal with when merging main into my branch during development.

The main ones were:
Enable MNEE tests on Metal: ef010da315
Rename to blocklist: 935c49f1cf
Fix typo from the blocklist rename (Thank you Sergey): 35198ec363

> For the 4.2, the `Use blocklist name for blocked tests` seems fine to port. The `Enable MNEE tests on Metal` i am not fully sure what it is about, can't see an exact commit. Does it require some change that i not in 4.2 yet? I don't know the full list of changes that need to be backported to avoid merge conflicts. All I remember is what I had to deal with when merging main into my branch during development. The main ones were: Enable MNEE tests on Metal: ef010da315b596edde5aaf9d8d60101ca3a64373 Rename to blocklist: 935c49f1cf97628d45a24ecee8c64a2e1f397f3b Fix typo from the blocklist rename (Thank you Sergey): 35198ec3633318cae4d203246ef044d7b6f1fee9

I don't see any issue with porting those. Basically, as long as ti is about expanding the coverage of tests that's all fine.
I'd just want to be a bit careful with porting commits that might change the look of renders.

I don't see any issue with porting those. Basically, as long as ti is about expanding the coverage of tests that's all fine. I'd just want to be a bit careful with porting commits that might change the look of renders.
Author
Member

That makes sense. I've added them to the LTS task
Edit: Temporarily removed because vector math tests will fail due to assert on release on build bot.

That makes sense. I've added them to the LTS task Edit: Temporarily removed because vector math tests will fail due to assert on release on build bot.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Label
Interest
Alembic
Interest
Animation & Rigging
Interest
Asset System
Interest
Audio
Interest
Automated Testing
Interest
Blender Asset Bundle
Interest
BlendFile
Interest
Collada
Interest
Compatibility
Interest
Compositing
Interest
Core
Interest
Cycles
Interest
Dependency Graph
Interest
Development Management
Interest
EEVEE
Interest
Freestyle
Interest
Geometry Nodes
Interest
Grease Pencil
Interest
ID Management
Interest
Images & Movies
Interest
Import Export
Interest
Line Art
Interest
Masking
Interest
Metal
Interest
Modeling
Interest
Modifiers
Interest
Motion Tracking
Interest
Nodes & Physics
Interest
OpenGL
Interest
Overlay
Interest
Overrides
Interest
Performance
Interest
Physics
Interest
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Interest
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Interest
Python API
Interest
Render & Cycles
Interest
Render Pipeline
Interest
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Interest
Text Editor
Interest
Translations
Interest
Triaging
Interest
Undo
Interest
USD
Interest
User Interface
Interest
UV Editing
Interest
VFX & Video
Interest
Video Sequencer
Interest
Viewport & EEVEE
Interest
Virtual Reality
Interest
Vulkan
Interest
Wayland
Interest
Workbench
Interest: X11
Legacy
Asset Browser Project
Legacy
Blender 2.8 Project
Legacy
Milestone 1: Basic, Local Asset Browser
Legacy
OpenGL Error
Meta
Good First Issue
Meta
Papercut
Meta
Retrospective
Meta
Security
Module
Animation & Rigging
Module
Core
Module
Development Management
Module
Grease Pencil
Module
Modeling
Module
Nodes & Physics
Module
Pipeline, Assets & IO
Module
Platforms, Builds & Tests
Module
Python API
Module
Render & Cycles
Module
Sculpt, Paint & Texture
Module
Triaging
Module
User Interface
Module
VFX & Video
Module
Viewport & EEVEE
Platform
FreeBSD
Platform
Linux
Platform
macOS
Platform
Windows
Severity
High
Severity
Low
Severity
Normal
Severity
Unbreak Now!
Status
Archived
Status
Confirmed
Status
Duplicate
Status
Needs Info from Developers
Status
Needs Information from User
Status
Needs Triage
Status
Resolved
Type
Bug
Type
Design
Type
Known Issue
Type
Patch
Type
Report
Type
To Do
No Milestone
No Assignees
3 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: blender/blender#124601
No description provided.