On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 09:43:02PM +0530, Anshuman Gupta wrote:
> From: Jyoti Yadav <jyoti.r.yadav@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Added new subtest for DC6 entry during DPMS on/off cycle.
> During DPMS on/off cycle DC6 counter is incremented.
>
> v2: Renamed the subtest name.
> v3: Rebased.
> v4: Rebased and address review comment.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jyoti Yadav <jyoti.r.yadav@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> tests/pm_dc.c | 9 +++++++++
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tests/pm_dc.c b/tests/pm_dc.c
> index 05f1363..244665d 100644
> --- a/tests/pm_dc.c
> +++ b/tests/pm_dc.c
> @@ -241,6 +241,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> test_dc_state_dpms(&data, CHECK_DC5);
> }
>
> + igt_subtest("dc6-dpms") {
> + /* Check DC6 counter is available for the platform.
> + * Skip the test if counter is not available.
> + */
> + read_dc_counter(data.drm_fd, CHECK_DC6);
> + test_dc_state_dpms(&data, CHECK_DC6);
> + //cleanup(&data);
Some debugging left-over above. That makes me think, why do the PSR
subtests do a modeset while the dpms ones don't? I think there is no
reason to make them behave differently.
> + }
> +
> igt_fixture {
> close(data.debugfs_fd);
> display_fini(&data);
> --
> 2.7.4
>
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
