diff mbox

[i-g-t,2/2] kms_psr_sink_crc: Add basic check for PSR active.

Message ID 1449482810-22540-2-git-send-email-rodrigo.vivi@intel.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Rodrigo Vivi Dec. 7, 2015, 10:06 a.m. UTC
It takes from 2 to 5 seconds to run.

Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
---
 tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

Comments

Daniel Vetter Dec. 8, 2015, 10:45 a.m. UTC | #1
On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 02:06:50AM -0800, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> It takes from 2 to 5 seconds to run.
> 
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> ---
>  tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> index 28ba5c2..4baf131 100644
> --- a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> +++ b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> @@ -605,6 +605,11 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> +	igt_subtest("psr_active_basic") {
> +		setup_test_plane(&data);
> +		igt_assert(wait_psr_entry(&data));
> +	}

I think I'm dense, but why do we need 2 BAT tests for psr? This one here
seems totally fine.
-Daniel

> +
>  	for (op = PAGE_FLIP; op <= RENDER; op++) {
>  		igt_subtest_f("primary_%s", op_str(op)) {
>  			data.test_plane = PRIMARY;
> -- 
> 2.4.3
>
Rodrigo Vivi Dec. 8, 2015, 3:32 p.m. UTC | #2
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 2:45 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 02:06:50AM -0800, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
>> It takes from 2 to 5 seconds to run.
>>
>> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
>> Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
>> ---
>>  tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c | 5 +++++
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
>> index 28ba5c2..4baf131 100644
>> --- a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
>> +++ b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
>> @@ -605,6 +605,11 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
>>               }
>>       }
>>
>> +     igt_subtest("psr_active_basic") {
>> +             setup_test_plane(&data);
>> +             igt_assert(wait_psr_entry(&data));
>> +     }
>
> I think I'm dense, but why do we need 2 BAT tests for psr? This one here
> seems totally fine.

No your are not. I just sent 2 solutions because I didn't know which
one you would prefer and I forgot if 2 to 5 secs was acceptable as
BAT.
So, ignore the other test. I will resubmit only this one...
And I believe that I forgot the other patch that reduces to 5 the
maximum wait time for psr entry on this test case..

> -Daniel
>
>> +
>>       for (op = PAGE_FLIP; op <= RENDER; op++) {
>>               igt_subtest_f("primary_%s", op_str(op)) {
>>                       data.test_plane = PRIMARY;
>> --
>> 2.4.3
>>
>
> --
> Daniel Vetter
> Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
> http://blog.ffwll.ch
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
Daniel Vetter Dec. 10, 2015, 9:39 a.m. UTC | #3
On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 07:32:35AM -0800, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 2:45 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 02:06:50AM -0800, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> >> It takes from 2 to 5 seconds to run.
> >>
> >> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> >> Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> >> ---
> >>  tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c | 5 +++++
> >>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> >> index 28ba5c2..4baf131 100644
> >> --- a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> >> +++ b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> >> @@ -605,6 +605,11 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> >>               }
> >>       }
> >>
> >> +     igt_subtest("psr_active_basic") {
> >> +             setup_test_plane(&data);
> >> +             igt_assert(wait_psr_entry(&data));
> >> +     }
> >
> > I think I'm dense, but why do we need 2 BAT tests for psr? This one here
> > seems totally fine.
> 
> No your are not. I just sent 2 solutions because I didn't know which
> one you would prefer and I forgot if 2 to 5 secs was acceptable as
> BAT.
> So, ignore the other test. I will resubmit only this one...
> And I believe that I forgot the other patch that reduces to 5 the
> maximum wait time for psr entry on this test case..

I think for such a major feature like PSR a few seconds in BAT is totally
ok.
-Daniel
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
index 28ba5c2..4baf131 100644
--- a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
+++ b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
@@ -605,6 +605,11 @@  int main(int argc, char *argv[])
 		}
 	}
 
+	igt_subtest("psr_active_basic") {
+		setup_test_plane(&data);
+		igt_assert(wait_psr_entry(&data));
+	}
+
 	for (op = PAGE_FLIP; op <= RENDER; op++) {
 		igt_subtest_f("primary_%s", op_str(op)) {
 			data.test_plane = PRIMARY;