CN111221734B - Verification method and device for graphic interface and computer storage medium - Google Patents

Abstract

Embodiments of the present invention disclose a verification method, device and computer storage medium for a graphical interface; the method includes: classifying the graphical application program interface API to be verified according to the output data type, and obtaining the type corresponding to the graphical API to be verified. ; Based on the mapping relationship between the preset verification use case and the output data type, the verification use case used to verify the graphics API to be verified is determined according to the type corresponding to the graphics API to be verified; based on the confirmed verification use case, the verification use case is Describe the graphics API to be verified for verification.

Description

A graphical interface verification method, device and computer storage medium

Technical field

Embodiments of the present invention relate to the field of computer graphics technology, and in particular, to a verification method, device and computer storage medium for a graphical interface.

Background technique

During the GPU software design process, comprehensive functional verification of graphics standard application programming interfaces (APIs, Application Programming Interfaces), such as OpenGL (Open Graphics Library), Direct3D, etc., is required. The graphics standard provides a large number of APIs. For example, the OpenGL 4.5 version contains nearly 1,000 APIs. At the same time, each API has a large number of parameters, and some APIs even have more than a hundred parameters. , the total number will be more after combining the number of parameters and the number of APIs. Therefore, taking OpenGL as an example, functional verification of its API requires a large number of test cases to cover, thus increasing the difficulty of comprehensive verification and increasing the number of use cases. The amount of calculation is greatly increased in the judgment and verification of results.

Contents of the invention

In view of this, embodiments of the present invention are expected to provide a graphical interface verification method, device and computer storage medium; while ensuring the comprehensiveness of verification, it can reduce the load and calculation amount of the verification framework, shorten the running time, and achieve efficient and fast Fully verified.

The technical solution of the embodiment of the present invention is implemented as follows:

In a first aspect, an embodiment of the present invention provides a method for verifying a graphical interface. The method includes:

Classify the graphics application program interface API to be verified according to the output data type, and obtain the type corresponding to the graphics API to be verified;

Based on the mapping relationship between the preset verification use case and the output data type, determine the verification use case used to verify the graphics API to be verified according to the type corresponding to the graphics API to be verified;

Verify the graphics API to be verified according to the confirmed verification use case.

In a second aspect, embodiments of the present invention provide a graphical interface verification device, which device includes: a classification part, a mapping part, and a verification part; wherein,

The classification part is configured to classify the graphics application program interface API to be verified according to the output data type, and obtain the type corresponding to the graphics API to be verified;

The mapping part is configured to determine the verification use case used to verify the graphics API to be verified based on the mapping relationship between the preset verification use case and the output data type according to the type corresponding to the graphics API to be verified;

The verification part is configured to verify the graphics API to be verified according to the confirmed verification use case.

In a third aspect, embodiments of the present invention provide a computing device, characterized in that the computing device includes: a communication interface, a memory and a processor; each component is coupled together through a bus system;

The communication interface is used for receiving and sending signals during the process of sending and receiving information with other external network elements;

The memory is used to store computer programs capable of running on the processor;

The processor is configured to execute the verification method steps of the graphical interface described in the first aspect when running the computer program.

In a fourth aspect, embodiments of the present invention provide a computer storage medium, characterized in that the computer storage medium stores a verification program of a graphical interface, and when the verification program of the graphical interface is executed by at least one processor, the first The verification method steps of the graphical interface described in the aspect.

Embodiments of the present invention provide a graphical interface verification method, device and computer storage medium; classify the output data types of the graphical API to be verified, and determine corresponding verification use cases corresponding to the classification for verification. Compared with the current conventional verification method for graphics API, functional verification can be completed without building a complete computing model. In this way, when the subsequent graphics standard version is updated, only modifications to the corresponding verification use cases of each type can be fully matched. The updated graphics standard version reduces modification correlation and improves iteration speed. In addition, there is no need to use the golden model for comprehensive comparison of all graphics APIs to be verified, which reduces the amount of calculations and time spent in the verification process and improves verification efficiency.

Description of drawings

Figure 1 is a schematic flow chart of a verification method for a graphical interface provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

Figure 2 is a schematic diagram of verification use case classification provided by the embodiment of the present invention;

Figure 3 is a schematic diagram of the verification process of a basic drawing type with few pixels provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

Figure 4 is a schematic flow chart of verification through compression coding provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

Figure 5 is a schematic diagram of coarse-grained verification provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

Figure 6 is a schematic diagram of fine-grained verification provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

Figure 7 is a schematic diagram of the composition of a verification device for a graphical interface provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

Figure 8 is a schematic diagram of a specific hardware structure of a computing device provided by an embodiment of the present invention.

Detailed ways

The technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings in the embodiments of the present invention.

The graphics standard application program interface takes OpenGL as an example. The current functional verification solutions for it can include two types of solutions:

First, calculation is performed through the model. For example, a software rendering calculation model is first implemented according to graphics standards; then the vertices, attributes, and states of the application are used as input, and the implemented calculation model is operated to obtain the desired results. For complex rendering applications, this solution has a large number of vertices and attribute states, and there are many processes that need to be processed in the calculation model of software rendering, resulting in a long calculation time; secondly, the algorithm processing and modules designed by the calculation model of software rendering itself Many, the correctness of the calculation model itself still needs to be fully verified, and the correctness of the calculation model is difficult to guarantee; finally, if the graphics standard version is updated, such as adding new features, then the calculation model needs to be rebuilt. The correlation during the modification process is large, which affects the iteration speed.

Second, conduct a comprehensive comparison through the golden model. For example, pre-store a pair of graphical models that should correctly process the results, that is, the golden model. Then compare the graphics generated during the verification process with the golden model, and determine the difference through the difference. The correctness of the object being verified. However, due to the numerous APIs and parameter combinations of graphics standards, a large number of generated graphics are generated, and all graphics need to be compared pixel by pixel, resulting in a very large amount of calculation, long calculation time, and low efficiency.

Based on the shortcomings of conventional verification schemes, the embodiments of the present invention are expected to provide a graphical interface verification method, device and computer storage medium; while ensuring the comprehensiveness of verification, the load and calculation volume of the verification framework can be reduced, and the running time can be shortened. Achieve efficient and fast comprehensive verification. Based on this, refer to Figure 1, which shows a graphical interface verification method provided by an embodiment of the present invention. The method may include:

S101: Classify the graphics API to be verified according to the output data type, and obtain the type corresponding to the graphics interface to be verified;

S102: Based on the mapping relationship between the preset verification use case and the output data type, determine the verification use case used to verify the graphics API to be verified according to the type corresponding to the graphics API to be verified;

S103: Verify the graphics API to be verified according to the confirmed verification use case.

It can be understood that through the technical solution described in Figure 1, the output data type of the graphics API to be verified is classified, and corresponding verification use cases are determined corresponding to the classification for verification. Compared with the current conventional verification method for graphics API, functional verification can be completed without building a complete computing model. In this way, when the subsequent graphics standard version is updated, only modifications to the corresponding verification use cases of each type can be fully matched. The updated graphics standard version reduces modification correlation and improves iteration speed. In addition, there is no need to use the golden model for comprehensive comparison of all graphics APIs to be verified, which reduces the amount of calculations and time spent in the verification process and improves verification efficiency.

For the technical solution shown in Figure 1, in some examples, the output data types of the graphics API to be verified may include: status information type, basic drawing type with few pixels, and graphics rendering type with multiple pixels; corresponding to the above output data Type, see Figure 2. Verification use cases can include: status information use cases, few-pixel basic drawing use cases, and multi-pixel graphics rendering use cases.

It should be noted that, in the embodiment of the present invention, the classification basis of the above output data types is preferably determined by the data amount of the data output by the graphics API to be verified. For example, if the data output by the graphics API to be verified is text content with a very small amount of data such as status information or drawing result content with fewer pixels, use the structural calculation model or golden model described in the aforementioned conventional verification scheme. A comprehensive comparison scheme will waste a lot of computing resources and reduce verification efficiency.

In some examples, corresponding to the output data type being the status information type, the verification of the graphics API to be verified based on the confirmed verification use case includes:

Compare the output text of the graphics API to be verified with the standard output text result, and confirm the verification result of the graphics API to be verified based on the comparison result.

For example, when the output data of the graphics API to be verified is text type data such as status information, the text content output based on the running result of the graphics API to be verified can be compared with the standard output text result. If the two are consistent, It means that the function verification of the graphics API to be verified whose output data type is the status information type has passed; if the two are inconsistent, it means that the function verification of the graphics API to be verified whose output data type is the status information type has not passed and further verification is required. Revise.

In some examples, referring to Figure 3, corresponding to the basic drawing type where the output data type is a few pixels, the graphics API to be verified is verified according to the confirmed verification use case, including:

S301: Calculate the input sampling vertices and sampling vertex attributes based on the rendering use case model, and obtain the theoretical rendering results of the graphics API to be verified;

S302: Process the input sampling vertices and sampling vertex attributes through the graphics API to be verified to obtain actual rendering results;

S303: Compare the theoretical rendering result and the actual rendering result, and confirm the verification result of the graphics API to be verified based on the comparison result.

For example, the rendering use case model used in this example is not the software rendering calculation model set up for complete graphics processing as described in the aforementioned conventional solution, but a simplified software rendering calculation model that is only verified for the graphics API to be verified. . In the graphics rendering pipeline, the actual rendering results obtained by processing the sampled vertices and sampled vertex attributes through the graphics API to be verified can be cached through methods such as transform feedback. During the specific comparison, you can compare the pixel values of the theoretical rendering results with the pixel values of the actual rendering results. Based on the consistency of the comparison, you can confirm whether the function verification of the graphics API to be verified for the basic drawing type with few pixels as the output data type has passed. .

In some examples, corresponding to the output data type being a multi-pixel graphics rendering type, the verification of the graphics API to be verified based on the confirmed verification use case includes:

Verify the graphics API to be verified at different granularities based on the set hierarchical determination strategy.

In some examples, referring to Figure 4, the graphics API to be verified is verified at different granularities based on the set hierarchical determination strategy, including:

S41: Encode the graphics to be verified and the set golden graphics obtained by rendering the graphics to be verified API according to the same compression encoding method, and obtain the first code corresponding to the graphics to be verified and the second code corresponding to the golden graphics. ;

S42: Compare the first code with the second code:

S43: If the two are consistent, it is determined that the graphic to be verified is consistent with the golden graphic;

S44: If the two are inconsistent, the difference graphic is obtained by subtracting the pixels at the corresponding positions of the graphic to be verified and the golden graphic;

S45: Compare the difference graph at a coarse-grained or fine-grained level to confirm whether the graph to be verified is similar to the golden graph.

It should be noted that the compression encoding method can be selected based on the accuracy and size of the graphics. The selection condition is based on the premise that the collision probability is as small as possible. During the specific implementation process, the compression encoding method can use a hash value calculation algorithm, such as the sha128 algorithm and md5 algorithm, etc., the graphics to be verified and the golden graphics use the same compression encoding method. The difference graph can be obtained by subtracting the pixel values at the same position between the graph to be verified and the golden graph. Generally speaking, after subtracting two identical graphs according to the pixels at the corresponding positions, the difference graph obtained is: A completely black graphic. If the difference graphic is not a completely black graphic, then the non-black pixels in the difference graphic are the difference pixels between the graphic to be verified and the golden graphic.

The above example content is the first layer in the aforementioned hierarchical determination strategy. Through encoding comparison at graphic granularity, it is confirmed whether the graphic to be verified is completely consistent with the golden graphic. If it is confirmed that they are not completely consistent, the similarity determination will continue according to the following specific examples.

For the above example, specifically, referring to Figure 5, the coarse-grained or fine-grained comparison based on the difference graph described in S45 to confirm whether the graph to be verified is similar to the golden graph includes:

S451: Compare the sum of squares of pixel values of different pixels in the difference graphic with the set sum of squares threshold, and determine the degree of difference between the graphic to be verified and the golden graphic based on the comparison result;

S452: If the degree of difference indicates that the difference between the graphic to be verified and the golden graphic is small, compare the pixel values of graphic blocks in the horizontal and vertical directions based on the different pixel positions in the differential graphic. According to the comparison The result determines whether the graphic to be verified is a similar graphic to the golden graphic.

It should be noted that the above specific example is the second layer in the aforementioned hierarchical judgment strategy. The difference graph obtained by graph subtraction is used as the granularity, and a coarse-grained judgment is made through the sum of the squares of the pixel values of the difference pixels to confirm the verification. Whether the difference between the graphic and the golden graphic is large; if the difference is large, it means that the color difference between the graphic to be verified and the golden graphic is large. If the difference is small, you can determine whether they are similar according to the following detailed examples.

In more detail, referring to Figure 6, S452 compares the pixel values of graphics blocks in the horizontal and vertical directions based on the different pixel positions in the difference graphics, and determines whether the graphics to be verified is the golden based on the comparison results. Similar figures to figures, including:

S4521: Select the first graphics block from the corresponding area in the graphics to be verified based on the set size with the difference pixel position as the center;

S4522: Calculate the corresponding pixel value differences in the horizontal and vertical directions of the first graphics block to obtain the increase or decrease status of the pixel values in the first graphics block;

S4523: Select the second graphic block from the corresponding area in the golden graphic according to the set size with the difference pixel position as the center;

S4524: Calculate corresponding pixel value differences in the horizontal and vertical directions of the second graphics block to obtain the increase or decrease status of the pixel values in the second graphics block;

S4525: Based on the correlation between the increase and decrease status of the pixel value in the first graphics block and the increase and decrease status of the pixel value in the second graphics block, determine whether there is a relationship between the graphic to be verified and the golden graphic. There is positional translation or linear scaling of pixel values;

S4526: If it is determined that there is position translation or pixel value linear scaling, determine whether the graphic to be verified is similar to the golden graphic based on the position translation coefficient or the pixel value linear scaling coefficient.

For the above detailed example, it is the third layer in the aforementioned hierarchical determination strategy. The graphics blocks in the difference graphics are used as the granularity, and the comparison is performed according to the graphics blocks where the difference pixels are located to perform fine-grained comparisons. In this embodiment of the present invention, the set size may be 9×9 pixels. Therefore, the first graphic block and the second graphic block are both 9×9 pixel blocks of equal size.

Through the above description of this example and each instance, through layering and encoding, compared with the pixel-by-pixel comparison with golden graphics in the conventional scheme, the amount of calculation and the time spent in determining the calculation result are reduced; through the above analysis The layer strategy reduces the amount of data that needs to be stored and the number of storage spaces to be opened; the compression encoding method also reduces the storage space required for a single result. During the specific implementation process, the golden graphics and their compressed encoding values can be pre-stored, thereby reducing repeated encoding calculation processes during the verification process, and the thresholds and sizes set above can be selected according to the actual application process. and settings, which will not be described in detail in the embodiment of the present invention.

Based on the above embodiment, refer to Figure 7, which shows a graphical interface verification device 70 provided by an embodiment of the present invention. The device 70 includes: a classification part 701, a mapping part 702, and a verification part 703; wherein,

The classification part 701 is configured to classify the graphics application program interface API to be verified according to the output data type, and obtain the type corresponding to the graphics API to be verified;

The mapping part 702 is configured to determine the verification use case used to verify the graphics API to be verified based on the mapping relationship between the preset verification use case and the output data type according to the type corresponding to the graphics API to be verified;

The verification part 703 is configured to verify the graphics API to be verified according to the confirmed verification use case.

In some examples, the output data types of the graphics API to be verified include: status information type, basic drawing type with few pixels, and graphics rendering type with multiple pixels; correspondingly, the verification use cases include: status information use cases, few pixels Basic pixel drawing use cases and multi-pixel graphics rendering use cases.

In some examples, corresponding to the output data type being the status information type, the verification part 703 is configured as:

Compare the output text of the graphics API to be verified with the standard output text result, and confirm the verification result of the graphics API to be verified based on the comparison result.

In some examples, corresponding to the output data type being a basic drawing type with few pixels, the verification part 703 is configured as:

Calculate the input sampling vertices and sampling vertex attributes based on the rendering use case model to obtain the theoretical rendering results of the graphics API to be verified;

Process the input sampling vertices and sampling vertex attributes through the graphics API to be verified to obtain actual rendering results;

Compare the theoretical rendering result and the actual rendering result, and confirm the verification result of the graphics API to be verified based on the comparison result.

In some examples, corresponding to the output data type being a multi-pixel graphics rendering type, the verification part 703 is configured as:

Verify the graphics API to be verified at different granularities based on the set hierarchical determination strategy.

In some examples, the verification portion 703 is configured to:

The graphics to be verified and the set golden graphics obtained by rendering the graphics to be verified API are encoded according to the same compression encoding method, and the first code corresponding to the graphics to be verified and the second code corresponding to the golden graphics are obtained;

Compare the first encoding with the second encoding:

If the two are consistent, it is determined that the graph to be verified is consistent with the golden graph;

If the two are inconsistent, the difference graphic is obtained by subtracting the pixels at the corresponding positions of the graphic to be verified and the golden graphic;

Based on the difference graph, a coarse-grained or fine-grained comparison is performed to confirm whether the graph to be verified is similar to the golden graph.

In some examples, the verification portion 703 is configured to:

Compare the sum of squares of pixel values of different pixels in the difference graphic with a set sum of squares threshold, and determine the degree of difference between the graphic to be verified and the golden graphic based on the comparison result;

If the degree of difference indicates that the difference between the graphic to be verified and the golden graphic is small, compare the pixel values of graphic blocks in the horizontal and vertical directions based on the positions of different pixels in the differential graphic, and determine based on the comparison results. Whether the graphic to be verified is a similar graphic to the golden graphic.

In some examples, the verification portion 703 is configured to:

Select the first graphics block from the corresponding area in the graphics to be verified based on the set size with the difference pixel position as the center;

Calculate corresponding pixel value differences in the horizontal and vertical directions of the first graphics block to obtain the increase or decrease status of the pixel values in the first graphics block;

Select the second graphic block from the corresponding area in the golden graphic according to the set size with the difference pixel position as the center;

Calculate corresponding pixel value differences in the horizontal and vertical directions of the second graphics block to obtain the increase or decrease status of the pixel values in the second graphics block;

Based on the correlation between the increase and decrease status of the pixel value in the first graphics block and the increase and decrease status of the pixel value in the second graphics block, it is determined whether there is a position between the graphic to be verified and the golden graphic. Translation or linear scaling of pixel values;

If it is determined that there is position translation or pixel value linear scaling, it is determined whether the graphic to be verified is similar to the golden graphic based on the position translation coefficient or the pixel value linear scaling coefficient.

It can be understood that in this embodiment, "part" may be part of a circuit, part of a processor, part of a program or software, etc., and of course may also be a unit, or may be a module or non-modular.

In addition, each component in this embodiment can be integrated into one processing unit, or each unit can exist physically alone, or two or more units can be integrated into one unit. The above integrated units can be implemented in the form of hardware or software function modules.

If the integrated unit is implemented in the form of a software function module and is not sold or used as an independent product, it can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of this embodiment is essentially either The part that contributes to the existing technology or all or part of the technical solution can be embodied in the form of a software product. The computer software product is stored in a storage medium and includes a number of instructions to make a computer device (can It is a personal computer, server, or network device, etc.) or processor that executes all or part of the steps of the method described in this embodiment. The aforementioned storage media include: U disk, mobile hard disk, read only memory (ROM, Read Only Memory), random access memory (RAM, Random Access Memory), magnetic disk or optical disk and other various media that can store program codes.

Therefore, this embodiment provides a computer storage medium that stores a verification program of a graphical interface. When the verification program of the graphical interface is executed by at least one processor, the graphical interface in the above technical solution is implemented. Validation method steps.

According to the verification device 70 of the above graphical interface and the computer storage medium, see FIG. 8 , which shows the specific hardware structure of a computing device 80 capable of implementing the verification device 70 of the above graphical interface provided by an embodiment of the present invention. The computing device 80 may be a wireless device, a mobile or cellular phone (including so-called smart phones), a personal digital assistant (PDA), a video game console (including a video display, a mobile video game device, a mobile video conferencing unit), a laptop computer, Desktop computers, television set-top boxes, tablet computing devices, e-book readers, fixed or mobile media players, etc. Computing device 80 includes: communication interface 801, memory 802, and processor 803; the various components are coupled together through bus system 804. It can be understood that the bus system 804 is used to implement connection communication between these components. In addition to the data bus, the bus system 804 also includes a power bus, a control bus and a status signal bus. However, for the sake of clarity, the various buses are labeled bus system 804 in FIG. 8 . in,

The communication interface 801 is used for receiving and sending signals during the process of sending and receiving information with other external network elements;

The memory 802 is used to store computer programs that can run on the processor 803;

The processor 803 is configured to execute the steps of the verification method of the graphical interface in the foregoing technical solution when running the computer program, which will not be described again here.

It can be understood that the memory 802 in the embodiment of the present invention may be a volatile memory or a non-volatile memory, or may include both volatile and non-volatile memories. Among them, the non-volatile memory can be read-only memory (Read-Only Memory, ROM), programmable read-only memory (Programmable ROM, PROM), erasable programmable read-only memory (Erasable PROM, EPROM), electrically removable memory. Erase programmable read-only memory (Electrically EPROM, EEPROM) or flash memory. The volatile memory may be random access memory (RAM), which is used as an external cache. By way of illustration, but not limitation, many forms of RAM are available, such as static random access memory (SRAM), dynamic random access memory (Dynamic RAM, DRAM), synchronous dynamic random access memory (Synchronous DRAM, SDRAM), double data rate synchronous dynamic random access memory (Double Data RateSDRAM, DDRSDRAM), enhanced synchronous dynamic random access memory (Enhanced SDRAM, ESDRAM), synchronous link dynamic random access memory (Synchlink DRAM, SLDRAM) and Direct memory bus random access memory (DirectRambus RAM, DRRAM). The memory 802 of the systems and methods described herein is intended to include, but is not limited to, these and any other suitable types of memory.

The processor 803 may be an integrated circuit chip with signal processing capabilities. During the implementation process, each step of the above method can be completed by instructions in the form of hardware integrated logic circuits or software in the processor 803 . The above-mentioned processor 803 can be a general-purpose processor, a digital signal processor (Digital Signal Processor, DSP), an application specific integrated circuit (Application Specific Integrated Circuit, ASIC), a field programmable gate array (Field Programmable Gate Array, FPGA) or other Programmable logic devices, discrete gate or transistor logic devices, discrete hardware components. Each method, step and logical block diagram disclosed in the embodiment of the present invention can be implemented or executed. A general-purpose processor may be a microprocessor or the processor may be any conventional processor, etc. The steps of the method disclosed in conjunction with the embodiments of the present invention can be directly implemented by a hardware decoding processor, or executed by a combination of hardware and software modules in the decoding processor. The software module can be located in random access memory, flash memory, read-only memory, programmable read-only memory or electrically erasable programmable memory, registers and other mature storage media in this field. The storage medium is located in the memory 802. The processor 803 reads the information in the memory 802 and completes the steps of the above method in combination with its hardware.

It is understood that the embodiments described herein may be implemented in hardware, software, firmware, middleware, microcode, or a combination thereof. For hardware implementation, the processing unit can be implemented in one or more Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASIC), Digital Signal Processing (DSP), Digital Signal Processing Device (DSP Device, DSPD), programmable logic Device (Programmable LogicDevice, PLD), field-programmable gate array (Field-Programmable Gate Array, FPGA), general processor, controller, microcontroller, microprocessor, other electronic units used to perform the functions described in this application or a combination thereof.

For software implementation, the techniques described herein may be implemented through modules (eg, procedures, functions, etc.) that perform the functions described herein. Software code may be stored in memory and executed by a processor. The memory can be implemented in the processor or external to the processor.

Specifically, the processor 803 is further configured to run the computer program,

It should be noted that the technical solutions recorded in the embodiments of the present invention can be combined arbitrarily as long as there is no conflict.

The above are only specific embodiments of the present invention, but the protection scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any person familiar with the technical field can easily think of changes or substitutions within the technical scope disclosed by the present invention. should be covered by the protection scope of the present invention. Therefore, the protection scope of the present invention should be subject to the protection scope of the claims.

Claims (11)

1. A graphical interface verification method, characterized in that the method includes: Classify the graphics application program interface API to be verified according to the output data type, and obtain the type corresponding to the graphics API to be verified; Based on the mapping relationship between the preset verification use case and the output data type, determine the verification use case used to verify the graphics API to be verified according to the type corresponding to the graphics API to be verified; Verify the graphics API to be verified according to the confirmed verification use case. 2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the output data type of the graphics API to be verified includes: status information type, basic drawing type with few pixels, and graphics rendering type with multiple pixels; accordingly, the Verification use cases include: status information use cases, few-pixel basic drawing use cases, and multi-pixel graphics rendering use cases. 3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, corresponding to the output data type being a status information type, the verification of the graphics API to be verified according to the confirmed verification use case includes: Compare the output text of the graphics API to be verified with the standard output text result, and confirm the verification result of the graphics API to be verified based on the comparison result. 4. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, corresponding to the output data type being a basic drawing type with few pixels, the verification of the graphics API to be verified according to the confirmed verification use case includes: Calculate the input sampling vertices and sampling vertex attributes based on the rendering use case model to obtain the theoretical rendering results of the graphics API to be verified; Process the input sampling vertices and sampling vertex attributes through the graphics API to be verified to obtain actual rendering results; Compare the theoretical rendering result and the actual rendering result, and confirm the verification result of the graphics API to be verified based on the comparison result. 5. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, corresponding to the output data type being a multi-pixel graphics rendering type, the verification of the graphics API to be verified according to the confirmed verification use case includes: Verify the graphics API to be verified at different granularities based on the set hierarchical determination strategy. 6. The method according to claim 5, wherein the graphical API to be verified is verified at different granularities based on the set hierarchical determination strategy, including: The graphics to be verified and the set golden graphics obtained by rendering the graphics to be verified API are encoded according to the same compression encoding method, and the first code corresponding to the graphics to be verified and the second code corresponding to the golden graphics are obtained; Compare the first encoding to the second encoding: If the two are consistent, it is determined that the graph to be verified is consistent with the golden graph; If the two are inconsistent, the difference graphic is obtained by subtracting the pixels at the corresponding positions of the graphic to be verified and the golden graphic; Based on the difference graph, a coarse-grained or fine-grained comparison is performed to confirm whether the graph to be verified is similar to the golden graph. 7. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that the comparison based on the difference graphic according to coarse-grained or fine-grained to confirm whether the graphic to be verified is similar to the golden graphic includes: Compare the sum of squares of pixel values of different pixels in the difference graphic with a set sum of squares threshold, and determine the degree of difference between the graphic to be verified and the golden graphic based on the comparison result; If the degree of difference indicates that the difference between the graphic to be verified and the golden graphic is small, compare the pixel values of graphic blocks in the horizontal and vertical directions based on the positions of different pixels in the differential graphic, and determine based on the comparison results. Whether the graphic to be verified is a similar graphic to the golden graphic. 8. The method according to claim 7, characterized in that, based on the difference pixel point positions in the difference graphics, the pixel values of the graphics blocks are compared in the horizontal and vertical directions respectively, and whether the graphics to be verified is determined according to the comparison results. Similar graphics to the golden graphics include: Select the first graphics block from the corresponding area in the graphics to be verified based on the set size with the difference pixel position as the center; Calculate corresponding pixel value differences in the horizontal and vertical directions of the first graphics block to obtain the increase or decrease status of the pixel values in the first graphics block; Select the second graphic block from the corresponding area in the golden graphic according to the set size with the difference pixel position as the center; Calculate corresponding pixel value differences in the horizontal and vertical directions of the second graphics block to obtain the increase or decrease status of the pixel values in the second graphics block; Based on the correlation between the increase and decrease status of the pixel value in the first graphics block and the increase and decrease status of the pixel value in the second graphics block, it is determined whether there is a position between the graphic to be verified and the golden graphic. Translation or linear scaling of pixel values; If it is determined that there is position translation or pixel value linear scaling, it is determined whether the graphic to be verified is similar to the golden graphic based on the position translation coefficient or the pixel value linear scaling coefficient. 9. A graphical interface verification device, characterized in that the device includes: a classification part, a mapping part, and a verification part; wherein, The classification part is configured to classify the graphics application program interface API to be verified according to the output data type, and obtain the type corresponding to the graphics API to be verified; The mapping part is configured to determine the verification use case used to verify the graphics API to be verified based on the mapping relationship between the preset verification use case and the output data type according to the type corresponding to the graphics API to be verified; The verification part is configured to verify the graphics API to be verified according to the confirmed verification use case. 10. A computing device, characterized in that the computing device includes: a communication interface, a memory and a processor; each component is coupled together through a bus system; The communication interface is used for receiving and sending signals during the process of sending and receiving information with other external network elements; The memory is used to store computer programs capable of running on the processor; The processor is configured to execute the verification method steps of the graphical interface according to any one of claims 1 to 8 when running the computer program. 11. A computer storage medium, characterized in that the computer storage medium stores a verification program of a graphical interface, and when executed by at least one processor, the verification program of the graphical interface implements any one of claims 1 to 8 Verification method steps of graphical interface.