[PATCH 2/6] drm/xe/rtp: Drop rule matching cases from rtp_to_sr_cases and rtp_cases

[Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com>]

The kunit test cases for the RTP framework are currently separated into
three groups:

(1) rtp_rules_cases:
    Those to verify rule matching logic.

(2) rtp_to_sr_cases:
    Those to verify generation of save/restore tables from RTP tables.

(3) rtp_cases
    Those to verify processing of RTP tables without save/restore action
    associated, which are used for OOB workarounds.

Today we have some cases in (2) and (3) that are actually meant to
verify rule matching logic.  Now that we have (1), let's cleanup (2)
and (3) so that they become focused on their main objectives.

Signed-off-by: Gustavo Sousa <gustavo.sousa@intel.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_rtp_test.c | 122 ++-------------------------------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 116 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_rtp_test.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_rtp_test.c
index c3fea547da32..b2286dd9d92a 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_rtp_test.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/tests/xe_rtp_test.c
@@ -234,80 +234,6 @@ static const struct rtp_to_sr_test_case rtp_to_sr_cases[] = {
 			{}
 		},
 	},
-	{
-		.name = "match-or",
-		.expected_reg = REGULAR_REG1,
-		.expected_set_bits = REG_BIT(0) | REG_BIT(1) | REG_BIT(2),
-		.expected_clr_bits = REG_BIT(0) | REG_BIT(1) | REG_BIT(2),
-		.expected_active = BIT(0) | BIT(1) | BIT(2),
-		.expected_count_sr_entries = 1,
-		.entries = (const struct xe_rtp_entry_sr[]) {
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("first"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_yes), OR, FUNC(match_no)),
-			  XE_RTP_ACTIONS(SET(REGULAR_REG1, REG_BIT(0)))
-			},
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("middle"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no), FUNC(match_no), OR,
-				       FUNC(match_yes), OR,
-				       FUNC(match_no)),
-			  XE_RTP_ACTIONS(SET(REGULAR_REG1, REG_BIT(1)))
-			},
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("last"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no), OR, FUNC(match_yes)),
-			  XE_RTP_ACTIONS(SET(REGULAR_REG1, REG_BIT(2)))
-			},
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("no-match"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no), OR, FUNC(match_no)),
-			  XE_RTP_ACTIONS(SET(REGULAR_REG1, REG_BIT(3)))
-			},
-			{}
-		},
-	},
-	{
-		.name = "match-or-xfail",
-		.expected_reg = REGULAR_REG1,
-		.expected_count_sr_entries = 0,
-		.entries = (const struct xe_rtp_entry_sr[]) {
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("leading-or"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(OR, FUNC(match_yes)),
-			  XE_RTP_ACTIONS(SET(REGULAR_REG1, REG_BIT(0)))
-			},
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("trailing-or"),
-			  /*
-			   * First condition is match_no, otherwise the failure
-			   * wouldn't really trigger as RTP stops processing as
-			   * soon as it has a matching set of rules
-			   */
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no), OR),
-			  XE_RTP_ACTIONS(SET(REGULAR_REG1, REG_BIT(1)))
-			},
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("no-or-or-yes"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no), OR, OR, FUNC(match_yes)),
-			  XE_RTP_ACTIONS(SET(REGULAR_REG1, REG_BIT(2)))
-			},
-			{}
-		},
-	},
-	{
-		.name = "no-match-no-add-multiple-rules",
-		.expected_reg = REGULAR_REG1,
-		.expected_set_bits = REG_BIT(0),
-		.expected_clr_bits = REG_BIT(0),
-		.expected_active = BIT(0),
-		.expected_count_sr_entries = 1,
-		/* Don't coalesce second entry due to one of the rules */
-		.entries = (const struct xe_rtp_entry_sr[]) {
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("basic-1"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_yes)),
-			  XE_RTP_ACTIONS(SET(REGULAR_REG1, REG_BIT(0)))
-			},
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("basic-2"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_yes), FUNC(match_no)),
-			  XE_RTP_ACTIONS(SET(REGULAR_REG1, REG_BIT(1)))
-			},
-			{}
-		},
-	},
 	{
 		.name = "two-regs-two-entries",
 		.expected_reg = REGULAR_REG1,
@@ -535,33 +461,15 @@ static const struct rtp_test_case rtp_cases[] = {
 		},
 	},
 	{
-		.name = "inactive-1st_or_active-inactive",
+		.name = "inactive-active-inactive",
 		.expected_active = BIT(1),
 		.entries = (const struct xe_rtp_entry[]) {
 			{ XE_RTP_NAME("r1"),
 			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no)),
 			},
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("r2_or_conditions"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_yes), OR,
-				       FUNC(match_no), OR,
-				       FUNC(match_no)) },
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("r3"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no)),
-			},
-			{}
-		},
-	},
-	{
-		.name = "inactive-2nd_or_active-inactive",
-		.expected_active = BIT(1),
-		.entries = (const struct xe_rtp_entry[]) {
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("r1"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no)),
+			{ XE_RTP_NAME("r2"),
+			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_yes)),
 			},
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("r2_or_conditions"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no), OR,
-				       FUNC(match_yes), OR,
-				       FUNC(match_no)) },
 			{ XE_RTP_NAME("r3"),
 			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no)),
 			},
@@ -569,33 +477,15 @@ static const struct rtp_test_case rtp_cases[] = {
 		},
 	},
 	{
-		.name = "inactive-last_or_active-inactive",
-		.expected_active = BIT(1),
+		.name = "inactive-inactive-inactive",
+		.expected_active = 0,
 		.entries = (const struct xe_rtp_entry[]) {
 			{ XE_RTP_NAME("r1"),
 			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no)),
 			},
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("r2_or_conditions"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no), OR,
-				       FUNC(match_no), OR,
-				       FUNC(match_yes)) },
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("r3"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no)),
-			},
-			{}
-		},
-	},
-	{
-		.name = "inactive-no_or_active-inactive",
-		.expected_active = 0,
-		.entries = (const struct xe_rtp_entry[]) {
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("r1"),
+			{ XE_RTP_NAME("r2"),
 			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no)),
 			},
-			{ XE_RTP_NAME("r2_or_conditions"),
-			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no), OR,
-				       FUNC(match_no), OR,
-				       FUNC(match_no)) },
 			{ XE_RTP_NAME("r3"),
 			  XE_RTP_RULES(FUNC(match_no)),
 			},

-- 
2.52.0