Hi,
Thanks for creating a test for that, that's really appreciated :)
On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 11:14:12PM +0100, Michał Winiarski wrote:
> Add a simple test that checks whether the action is indeed called right
> away and that it is not called on the final drm_dev_put().
>
> Signed-off-by: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_managed_test.c | 65 ++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_managed_test.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_managed_test.c
> index 1652dca11d30c..a645ea42aee56 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_managed_test.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_managed_test.c
> @@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
> #define TEST_TIMEOUT_MS 100
>
> struct managed_test_priv {
> + struct drm_device *drm;
> + struct device *dev;
> bool action_done;
> wait_queue_head_t action_wq;
> };
> @@ -26,42 +28,75 @@ static void drm_action(struct drm_device *drm, void *ptr)
>
> static void drm_test_managed_run_action(struct kunit *test)
> {
> - struct managed_test_priv *priv;
> - struct drm_device *drm;
> - struct device *dev;
> + struct managed_test_priv *priv = test->priv;
> int ret;
>
> - priv = kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL);
> - KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, priv);
> - init_waitqueue_head(&priv->action_wq);
> + ret = drmm_add_action_or_reset(priv->drm, drm_action, priv);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
>
> - dev = drm_kunit_helper_alloc_device(test);
> - KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, dev);
> + ret = drm_dev_register(priv->drm, 0);
> + KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
> +
> + drm_dev_unregister(priv->drm);
> + drm_kunit_helper_free_device(test, priv->dev);
I think we'll need two patches here, one to convert to having an init
function, and one to actually add the new test, it's pretty confusing as
it is.
>
> - drm = __drm_kunit_helper_alloc_drm_device(test, dev, sizeof(*drm), 0, DRIVER_MODESET);
> - KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, drm);
> + ret = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(priv->action_wq, priv->action_done,
> + msecs_to_jiffies(TEST_TIMEOUT_MS));
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_GT(test, ret, 0);
> +}
>
> - ret = drmm_add_action_or_reset(drm, drm_action, priv);
> +static void drm_test_managed_release_action(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct managed_test_priv *priv = test->priv;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = drmm_add_action_or_reset(priv->drm, drm_action, priv);
> KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
>
> - ret = drm_dev_register(drm, 0);
> + ret = drm_dev_register(priv->drm, 0);
> KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
>
> - drm_dev_unregister(drm);
> - drm_kunit_helper_free_device(test, dev);
> + drmm_release_action(priv->drm, drm_action, priv);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_TRUE(test, priv->action_done);
> + priv->action_done = false;
> +
> + drm_dev_unregister(priv->drm);
> + drm_kunit_helper_free_device(test, priv->dev);
>
> ret = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(priv->action_wq, priv->action_done,
> msecs_to_jiffies(TEST_TIMEOUT_MS));
> - KUNIT_EXPECT_GT(test, ret, 0);
> + KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, ret, 0);
> +}
> +
> +static int drm_managed_test_init(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> + struct managed_test_priv *priv;
> +
> + priv = kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(*priv), GFP_KERNEL);
> + KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, priv);
> + init_waitqueue_head(&priv->action_wq);
Also, I know that it was there before, but I'm not sure it's valid from
a lifetime point of view. Or at least, we have to think hard enough
about it to just remove that construct
> + priv->dev = drm_kunit_helper_alloc_device(test);
> + KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, priv->dev);
> +
> + priv->drm = __drm_kunit_helper_alloc_drm_device(test, priv->dev, sizeof(*priv->drm),
> + 0, DRIVER_MODESET);
> + KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, priv->drm);
For example by storing the drm_device struct in the priv structure
directly, and thus everything will just work out.
Maxime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
