Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v4 1/4] test/psr: Skip PSR2 tests when panel resolution is bigger than PSR2 HW supports

[Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.com>]

On Thu, 2019-01-24 at 10:20 -0800, Souza, Jose wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-01-23 at 22:39 -0800, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 06:25:07PM -0800, Dhinakaran Pandiyan
> > wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2019-01-23 at 15:56 -0800, José Roberto de Souza wrote:
> > > > If resolution that will be used in PSR tests is bigger than the
> > > > resolution that PSR2 HW supports, PSR2 will not be enabled so
> > > > those
> > > > tests should be skiped. Most of eDP panels only supports one
> > > > resolution that is why we don't even try to use other
> > > > resolution.
> > > > 
> > > > BSpec: 7713
> > > 
> > > I don't like the fact that we are re-implementing driver code in
> > > the
> > > test to avoid false-positives. We should really replace the panel
> > > on
> > > the WHL machine with a panel that is expected to work. 
> > > 
> > 
> > I fully agree. The debugfs should be auto-suficient.
> > 
> > In the past it was the idea of Source OK. if sink support yes and
> > source ok
That had a problem too, "Source OK" was set after driver completed all
the checks and just before enabling PSR2. In effect, it started
becoming a duplicate of the "Enabled" field and we weren't able to
catch if the driver checks before psr_enable() were wrong.


> > and we tried to enabled but it is not getting active,
> > than we have a bug somewhere.
> > 
> > I don't know the current status of the psr debugfs anymore, but
> > I believe the test case should infer this information from there
> > somehow instead of re-implement the driver code here.
> > 
> > > But, as a temporary measure to make CI happy and enable PSR2.
> > 
> > why is this only affecting PSR2 case?
> 
> PSR2 has a maximum resolution suported and the only resolution that
> CI
> eDP panel supports is bigger than that.
> 
> > 
> > > Reviewed-by: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.com>
> > > 
> > > Rodrigo, what's your opinion on this?
> > > 
> > > -DK
> > > > Cc: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.com>
> > > > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza@intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  tests/kms_psr.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++--
> > > >  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/tests/kms_psr.c b/tests/kms_psr.c
> > > > index 3e16a6bf..4792e158 100644
> > > > --- a/tests/kms_psr.c
> > > > +++ b/tests/kms_psr.c
> > > > @@ -445,13 +445,30 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> > > >  		igt_require_f(sink_support(&data, PSR_MODE_1),
> > > >  			      "Sink does not support PSR\n");
> > > >  
> > > > -		data.supports_psr2 = sink_support(&data,
> > > > PSR_MODE_2);
> > > > -
> > > >  		data.bufmgr =
> > > > drm_intel_bufmgr_gem_init(data.drm_fd,
> > > > 4096);
> > > >  		igt_assert(data.bufmgr);
> > > >  		drm_intel_bufmgr_gem_enable_reuse(data.bufmgr);
> > > >  
> > > >  		display_init(&data);
> > > > +
> > > > +		data.supports_psr2 = sink_support(&data,
> > > > PSR_MODE_2);
> > > > +		if (data.supports_psr2) {
> > > > +			uint32_t devid =
> > > > intel_get_drm_devid(data.drm_fd);
> > > > +			uint16_t max_h = 0, max_v = 0;
> > > > +			int gen = intel_gen(devid);
> > > > +
> > > > +			if (gen >= 10 || IS_GEMINILAKE(devid))
> > > > {
> > > > +				max_h = 4096;
> > > > +				max_v = 2304;
> > > > +			} else if (gen == 9) {
> > > > +				max_h = 3640;
> > > > +				max_v = 2304;
> > > > +			}
> > > > +
> > > > +			if (data.mode->hdisplay > max_h ||
> > > > +			    data.mode->vdisplay > max_v)
> > > > +				data.supports_psr2 = false;
> > > > +		}
> > > >  	}
> > > >  
> > > >  	for (data.op_psr_mode = PSR_MODE_1; data.op_psr_mode <=
> > > > PSR_MODE_2;

_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev