From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BDF110E48A for ; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 04:30:22 +0000 (UTC) From: "Gupta, Anshuman" To: "Dixit, Ashutosh" Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 04:30:20 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20220421170245.11898-1-anshuman.gupta@intel.com> <20220421170245.11898-3-anshuman.gupta@intel.com> <87bkwudnhf.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <87bkwudnhf.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t 2/3] test: i915_pm_rpm: conditional initialization of igt_display_t List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org" , "Nilawar, Badal" Errors-To: igt-dev-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "igt-dev" List-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: Dixit, Ashutosh > Sent: Friday, April 22, 2022 5:00 AM > To: Gupta, Anshuman > Cc: igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org; Nilawar, Badal > Subject: Re: [PATCH i-g-t 2/3] test: i915_pm_rpm: conditional initializat= ion of > igt_display_t >=20 > On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 10:02:44 -0700, Anshuman Gupta wrote: > > > > Initialize igt_display_t display only in case of there are valid drm > > kms resources. > > > > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta > > --- > > tests/i915/i915_pm_rpm.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/tests/i915/i915_pm_rpm.c b/tests/i915/i915_pm_rpm.c index > > 2cc89eef2..7a0176b2f 100644 > > --- a/tests/i915/i915_pm_rpm.c > > +++ b/tests/i915/i915_pm_rpm.c > > @@ -406,9 +406,9 @@ static void init_mode_set_data(struct mode_set_data > *data) > > } > > > > kmstest_set_vt_graphics_mode(); > > + igt_display_require(&data->display, drm_fd); > > } > > > > - igt_display_require(&data->display, drm_fd); >=20 > Is this needed? Isn't display_disabled set to false in setup_environment(= ) for > headless? Or is this the right thing to do? Maybe somebody from display c= an > review? Thanks. I think we can remove the display_disabled flag. I will fix this in next revision. Thanks, Anshuman Gupta.