On Thu, 2017-09-21 at 07:53 -0700, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 01:37:31AM +0000, Radhakrishna Sripada wrote: > > The substring to be matched is modified to reflect kernel code. > > Well, technically it is not a regression on psr_drrs because it has > this bug since the beginning ;) > > Also this commit message doesn't explain the false positive case > that DK pointed out. > > Also this doesn't explain that is safe to use the reverse logic > of !yes because DRRS is only enabled for eDP. Otherwise we would > have to parse specifically the eDP block. > > What brings me the question of why do we list all that useless > information on debugfs? :) > > > > > Fixes: 33355210a43e (igt/kms_psr_sink_crc: Add psr_drrs subtest) > > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan@xxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Radhakrishna Sripada <radhakrishna.sripada@xxxxxxxxx> > > Please also CC other folks that are currently working on DRRS.. > > > --- > > tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c > > index 1c25f2c81a34..f023b12c0131 100644 > > --- a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c > > +++ b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c > > @@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ static bool drrs_disabled(data_t *data) > > > > igt_debugfs_read(data->drm_fd, "i915_drrs_status", buf); > > > > - return strstr(buf, "DRRS Support: No\n"); > > + return !strstr(buf, "DRRS Supported: Yes\n"); Neat and simple. Please send a patch to change the debugfs output that Rodrigo pointed out. > > } > > > > static void run_test(data_t *data) > > -- > > 2.9.3 > > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
