On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 01:24:09PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Ulrich,
>
> Thank you for the patch.
>
> On Thursday, 15 March 2018 16:45:38 EET Ulrich Hecht wrote:
> > Fixes false negatives on non-i915 platforms.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ulrich Hecht <ulrich.hecht+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > tests/kms_panel_fitting.c | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/tests/kms_panel_fitting.c b/tests/kms_panel_fitting.c
> > index b3cee22..6d0be50 100644
> > --- a/tests/kms_panel_fitting.c
> > +++ b/tests/kms_panel_fitting.c
> > @@ -243,6 +243,7 @@ static void test_atomic_fastset(igt_display_t *display)
> > igt_set_module_param_int("fastboot", 1);
> >
> > igt_require(display->is_atomic);
> > + igt_require(is_i915_device(display->drm_fd));
> > igt_require(intel_gen(intel_get_drm_devid(display->drm_fd)) >= 5);
>
> I'm fine with this patch as a quick fix, but what in this test is Intel-
> specific ? Can't we replace the Intel generation check with a different
> feature check ?
There's some checks in there that we can do certain panel fitter mode
changes without a modeset (throught ALLOW_MODESET for atomic commits).
That's 100% encoding intel hw constraints: Our hw can disable the panel
fitter without a modest (so going from upscaled -> native resolution), but
not any of the other changes (native -> upscaled or 2 different upscaled
versions).
-Daniel
>
> > for_each_pipe_with_valid_output(display, pipe, output) {
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Laurent Pinchart
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
