From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBB566E063 for ; Thu, 10 Jun 2021 12:50:36 +0000 (UTC) From: "Ruhl, Michael J" Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 12:50:32 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20210609121733.16461-1-venkata.sai.patnana@intel.com> <20210609121733.16461-8-venkata.sai.patnana@intel.com> <1bc6690fee52407c9ed683b0c0cecb48@intel.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t 08/11] tests/kms_addfb_basic: Add invalid buffer object test for discrete List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: igt-dev-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "igt-dev" To: "Latvala, Petri" Cc: "igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org" , Mohammed Khajapasha List-ID: >-----Original Message----- >From: Latvala, Petri >Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2021 8:47 AM >To: Ruhl, Michael J >Cc: Patnana, Venkata Sai ; igt- >dev@lists.freedesktop.org; Mohammed Khajapasha > >Subject: Re: [PATCH i-g-t 08/11] tests/kms_addfb_basic: Add invalid buffer >object test for discrete > >On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 03:30:46PM +0300, Ruhl, Michael J wrote: >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: Patnana, Venkata Sai >> >Sent: Wednesday, June 9, 2021 8:18 AM >> >To: igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org >> >Cc: Patnana, Venkata Sai ; Mohammed >> >Khajapasha ; Latvala; Latvala, Petri >> >; Ruhl, Michael J >> >Subject: [PATCH i-g-t 08/11] tests/kms_addfb_basic: Add invalid buffer >object >> >test for discrete >> > >> >From: Mohammed Khajapasha >> > >> >Add invalid buffer object test case for discrete, to validate >> >IOCTL_MODE_ADDFB2 ioctl for LMEM, the framebuffer backing >> >gem objects should be from local memory for discrete. >> > >> >Cc: Latvala, Petri >> >Cc: Michael J. Ruhl >> >Signed-off-by: Mohammed Khajapasha >> > >> >--- >> > tests/kms_addfb_basic.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++ >> > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) >> > >> >diff --git a/tests/kms_addfb_basic.c b/tests/kms_addfb_basic.c >> >index 1fb18d668f..aac74a7568 100644 >> >--- a/tests/kms_addfb_basic.c >> >+++ b/tests/kms_addfb_basic.c >> >@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ >> > >> > #include "igt_rand.h" >> > #include "igt_device.h" >> >+#include "i915/intel_memory_region.h" >> > >> > uint32_t gem_bo; >> > uint32_t gem_bo_small; >> >@@ -146,6 +147,21 @@ static void invalid_tests(int fd) >> > igt_assert(f.modifier[0] == 0); >> > } >> > >> >+ igt_subtest("invalid-smem-bo-on-discrete") { >> >+ int devid; >> >+ uint32_t handle, stride; >> >+ uint64_t size; >> >+ >> >+ igt_require_intel(fd); >> >+ devid = intel_get_drm_devid(fd); >> >> This will only work on if the discrete card is the only card on the system. >> >> Is there a better way to: >> >> 1) identify discrete cards and/or >> 2) specifically select a discrete card for testing? > >The test does not select the device to use. The admin _running_ the >test does that, with IGT_DEVICE. Ok, that makes sense. I believe you (Petri) had a comment that should be addressed, but from my perspective Acked-by: Michael J. Ruhl >With that done, mapping of results will be > >non-intel: skip >intel integrated: skip >intel discrete: actually tested > >which looks correct. We're trying to test what happens specifically >if the used device is intel discrete, skip otherwise. > >-- >Petri Latvala _______________________________________________ igt-dev mailing list igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev