| Message ID | 20171212222835.5575-1-dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:28:35PM +0000, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote: > (kms_psr_sink_crc:1717) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: > wait_psr_entry(&data) > (kms_psr_sink_crc:1717) CRITICAL: Last errno: 25, Inappropriate ioctl > for device > > isn't very useful, the Source_OK field would have indicated that the > requirements to enable PSR weren't met in this case. Is this still the case with the source_ok getting killed? > > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.com> > --- > tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c > index 831368b2..c586d6e1 100644 > --- a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c > +++ b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c > @@ -223,6 +223,7 @@ static bool wait_psr_entry(data_t *data) > return true; > sleep(1); > } > + igt_debugfs_dump(data->drm_fd, "i915_edp_psr_status"); anyways seems a good thing to have... so, with the commit message modified feel free to use: Acked-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> > return false; > } > > -- > 2.11.0 >
On Tuesday, December 19, 2017 2:02:47 PM PST Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:28:35PM +0000, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote: > > (kms_psr_sink_crc:1717) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: > > wait_psr_entry(&data) > > (kms_psr_sink_crc:1717) CRITICAL: Last errno: 25, Inappropriate ioctl > > for device > > > > isn't very useful, the Source_OK field would have indicated that the > > requirements to enable PSR weren't met in this case. > > Is this still the case with the source_ok getting killed? "Enabled:" will do the same job, conveying whether an attempt to enable PSR was made. > > > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> > > Signed-off-by: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.com> > > --- > > > > tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c > > index 831368b2..c586d6e1 100644 > > --- a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c > > +++ b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c > > @@ -223,6 +223,7 @@ static bool wait_psr_entry(data_t *data) > > > > return true; > > > > sleep(1); > > > > } > > > > + igt_debugfs_dump(data->drm_fd, "i915_edp_psr_status"); > > anyways seems a good thing to have... > so, with the commit message modified feel free to use: > > Acked-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> > Thanks! > > return false; > > > > } > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
diff --git a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c index 831368b2..c586d6e1 100644 --- a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c +++ b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c @@ -223,6 +223,7 @@ static bool wait_psr_entry(data_t *data) return true; sleep(1); } + igt_debugfs_dump(data->drm_fd, "i915_edp_psr_status"); return false; }
(kms_psr_sink_crc:1717) CRITICAL: Failed assertion: wait_psr_entry(&data) (kms_psr_sink_crc:1717) CRITICAL: Last errno: 25, Inappropriate ioctl for device isn't very useful, the Source_OK field would have indicated that the requirements to enable PSR weren't met in this case. Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@intel.com> --- tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)