| Message ID | 1448074610-8661-1-git-send-email-vivek.kasireddy@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 18:56 -0800, Vivek Kasireddy wrote: > In some cases, we just need one valid (connected) output to perform > a test. This macro can help in these situations by not having to > put the test code inside a for loop that iterates over all the outputs. > > v2: Added a brief documentation for this macro. > > Suggested-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper at intel.com> > Cc: Thomas Wood <thomas.wood@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Vivek Kasireddy <vivek.kasireddy@intel.com> > --- > lib/igt_kms.h | 12 ++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/lib/igt_kms.h b/lib/igt_kms.h > index 965c47c..a0bb066 100644 > --- a/lib/igt_kms.h > +++ b/lib/igt_kms.h > @@ -279,6 +279,18 @@ void igt_wait_for_vblank(int drm_fd, enum pipe pipe); > for (int i__ = 0; (plane) = &(display)->pipes[(pipe)].planes[i__], \ > i__ < (display)->pipes[(pipe)].n_planes; i__++) > > +/** > + * get_first_connected_output: > + * @display: Initialized igt_display_t type object > + * @output: igt_output_t type object > + * > + * Returns: First valid (connected) output. > + */ > +#define get_first_connected_output(display, output) \ > + for (int i__ = 0; i__ < (display)->n_outputs; i__++) \ > + if ((output = &(display)->outputs[i__]), output->valid) \ > + break > + Is it possible that there is no valid output? Ander
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 03:49:20PM +0200, Ander Conselvan De Oliveira wrote: > On Fri, 2015-11-20 at 18:56 -0800, Vivek Kasireddy wrote: > > In some cases, we just need one valid (connected) output to perform > > a test. This macro can help in these situations by not having to > > put the test code inside a for loop that iterates over all the outputs. > > > > v2: Added a brief documentation for this macro. > > > > Suggested-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper at intel.com> > > Cc: Thomas Wood <thomas.wood@intel.com> > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Kasireddy <vivek.kasireddy@intel.com> > > --- > > lib/igt_kms.h | 12 ++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/lib/igt_kms.h b/lib/igt_kms.h > > index 965c47c..a0bb066 100644 > > --- a/lib/igt_kms.h > > +++ b/lib/igt_kms.h > > @@ -279,6 +279,18 @@ void igt_wait_for_vblank(int drm_fd, enum pipe pipe); > > for (int i__ = 0; (plane) = &(display)->pipes[(pipe)].planes[i__], \ > > i__ < (display)->pipes[(pipe)].n_planes; i__++) > > > > +/** > > + * get_first_connected_output: > > + * @display: Initialized igt_display_t type object > > + * @output: igt_output_t type object > > + * > > + * Returns: First valid (connected) output. > > + */ > > +#define get_first_connected_output(display, output) \ > > + for (int i__ = 0; i__ < (display)->n_outputs; i__++) \ > > + if ((output = &(display)->outputs[i__]), output->valid) \ > > + break > > + > > Is it possible that there is no valid output? > We also need to check at least crtc restrictions, otherwise bsw will fall over mightly. Or well anything with MIPI DSI encoders. -Daniel
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 06:56:50PM -0800, Vivek Kasireddy wrote: > In some cases, we just need one valid (connected) output to perform > a test. This macro can help in these situations by not having to > put the test code inside a for loop that iterates over all the outputs. > > v2: Added a brief documentation for this macro. > > Suggested-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper at intel.com> > Cc: Thomas Wood <thomas.wood@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Vivek Kasireddy <vivek.kasireddy@intel.com> > --- > lib/igt_kms.h | 12 ++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/lib/igt_kms.h b/lib/igt_kms.h > index 965c47c..a0bb066 100644 > --- a/lib/igt_kms.h > +++ b/lib/igt_kms.h > @@ -279,6 +279,18 @@ void igt_wait_for_vblank(int drm_fd, enum pipe pipe); > for (int i__ = 0; (plane) = &(display)->pipes[(pipe)].planes[i__], \ > i__ < (display)->pipes[(pipe)].n_planes; i__++) > > +/** > + * get_first_connected_output: > + * @display: Initialized igt_display_t type object > + * @output: igt_output_t type object > + * > + * Returns: First valid (connected) output. > + */ > +#define get_first_connected_output(display, output) \ > + for (int i__ = 0; i__ < (display)->n_outputs; i__++) \ > + if ((output = &(display)->outputs[i__]), output->valid) \ > + break Why is this a fragile macro instead of a simple function that just returns what we need? > + > #define IGT_FIXED(i,f) ((i) << 16 | (f)) > > void igt_enable_connectors(void); > -- > 2.4.3 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
diff --git a/lib/igt_kms.h b/lib/igt_kms.h index 965c47c..a0bb066 100644 --- a/lib/igt_kms.h +++ b/lib/igt_kms.h @@ -279,6 +279,18 @@ void igt_wait_for_vblank(int drm_fd, enum pipe pipe); for (int i__ = 0; (plane) = &(display)->pipes[(pipe)].planes[i__], \ i__ < (display)->pipes[(pipe)].n_planes; i__++) +/** + * get_first_connected_output: + * @display: Initialized igt_display_t type object + * @output: igt_output_t type object + * + * Returns: First valid (connected) output. + */ +#define get_first_connected_output(display, output) \ + for (int i__ = 0; i__ < (display)->n_outputs; i__++) \ + if ((output = &(display)->outputs[i__]), output->valid) \ + break + #define IGT_FIXED(i,f) ((i) << 16 | (f)) void igt_enable_connectors(void);
In some cases, we just need one valid (connected) output to perform a test. This macro can help in these situations by not having to put the test code inside a for loop that iterates over all the outputs. v2: Added a brief documentation for this macro. Suggested-by: Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper at intel.com> Cc: Thomas Wood <thomas.wood@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Vivek Kasireddy <vivek.kasireddy@intel.com> --- lib/igt_kms.h | 12 ++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)