From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C049210E76C for ; Thu, 26 Oct 2023 07:31:26 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2023 13:01:04 +0530 Content-Language: en-US To: "Joshi, Kunal1" , Kamil Konieczny , Juha-Pekka Heikkila , References: <20231001103006.431894-1-kunal1.joshi@intel.com> <17bd5bee-d5ff-9351-ed9b-e917b780d491@intel.com> <1f8f7bfc-21cb-e986-401a-591892adefeb@intel.com> <8bba0a41-769f-4921-89b5-0f5d2d315459@gmail.com> <20231004103641.wj5dukxexd73r62e@kamilkon-desk.igk.intel.com> <672e13c3-3d92-63c3-07d2-6dd5491d3c8e@intel.com> From: "Modem, Bhanuprakash" In-Reply-To: <672e13c3-3d92-63c3-07d2-6dd5491d3c8e@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t 0/2] Add test for hotplug validation in simulation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: igt-dev-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "igt-dev" List-ID: Hi Kunal, On Thu-26-10-2023 12:08 pm, Joshi, Kunal1 wrote: > Hello Kamil, > > On 10/4/2023 4:06 PM, Kamil Konieczny wrote: >> Hi Juha-Pekka, >> >> On 2023-10-04 at 11:15:25 +0300, Juha-Pekka Heikkila wrote: >>> On 4.10.2023 8.48, Modem, Bhanuprakash wrote: >>>> Forgot to add Kamil to the TO/CC list. >>>> >>>> On Tue-03-10-2023 02:42 pm, Modem, Bhanuprakash wrote: >>>>> Hi Kunal, >>>>> >>>>> On Sun-01-10-2023 04:00 pm, Kunal Joshi wrote: >>>>>> Test to validate hotplug in simulation environment we >>>>>> have scratch pad register 0x4f080 from which we can >>>>>> trigger uevents such as HPD, VBLANK..etc, Idea is to >>>>>> have port mapping placed in igtrcthrough which test >>>>>> can write to 0x4f080 and check if we get hotplug >>>>> In first glance, do we really need to upstream this test? I am >>>>> pretty sure, no one (including Intel) is going to use this test from >>>>> upstream repo (We don't have any simulation environment in public >>>>> CI). >>>>> >>>>> So, we can't merge this. >>>>> >>>>> + Kamil, thoughts? >>>>> >>> Not sure why this wouldn't fit in upstream? It is valid igt test, >>> will be of >>> interest only for Intel guys hence in in intel directory and when in >>> upstream it will not be causing issues during backports. We anyway >>> already >>> have more generic tests taking into account if they're being run in >>> simulated environments. >>> >>> /Juha-Pekka >>> >> imho this should not be upstreamed as any user outside Intel >> will not be able to run it. Why it cannot be a subtest with >> some generic test like kms_hotplug.c with only timeout increased >> for simulation? Such test may be in upstream if it will work >> with existing hardware in CI. >> >> Regards, >> Kamil > > This test will only work in presi environment, for testing hotplug in > hardware we have kms_chamelium_hpd, > But we can have it in upstream as someday we may require to run upstream > igt's on presi. > > Any thoughts bhanu and JP? As mentioned in previous replies, I am fine to upstream these changes as we are keeping these tests inside the "tests/intel" directory, and non-intel users are not going to use these tests. - Bhanu > > Thanks and Regards > Kunal Joshi > >