Op 08-03-17 om 14:45 schreef Mika Kahola: > On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 13:38 +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: >> Hey, >> >> Op 07-02-17 om 14:33 schreef Mika Kahola: >>> When doing a full atomic modeset, kernel should fail if the flag >>> DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET is not set. Let's add this test as >>> part of >>> 'kms_plane_lowres' testset. The testcases are 'pipe-x-allow- >>> modeset' where >>> x stands for pipe in question. >>> >>> For: VIZ-6955 >> I think it makes sense for this to be a standalone test, >> kms_atomic_allow_modeset. >> igt_display >> >> It should be trying the following: >> >> 0. Add a way to control the active property to lib/igt_kms.c either >> auto (backwards compatible), off or on. >> 1. Toggling the active property only, with and without mode set. >> (Testing active_changed vs modeset flag) >> 2. With the active property set to disabled (dpms off), try to set >> and unset the mode. (Testing mode_changed vs modeset flag) >> 3. Try swapping connectors on a crtc. (Testing connectors_changed vs >> modeset flag) >> >> With and without TEST_ONLY. :) > Thanks Maarten for review. I guess it's back to the drawing board then > :) > > I could change the test as a standalone one that tests > DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET flag with dpms on/off. No problem, fortunately adding standalone atomic tests is easy with the igt_display framework! :) _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
