Hi, On 04/22/2015 05:07 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 05:00:27PM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> This matches the behaviour in kernel patch "drm/i915/skl: Disallow tiling changes during page flip". Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- tests/kms_flip_tiling.c | 23 ++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/kms_flip_tiling.c b/tests/kms_flip_tiling.c index 8345505..3eef4cc 100644 --- a/tests/kms_flip_tiling.c +++ b/tests/kms_flip_tiling.c @@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ fill_linear_fb(struct igt_fb *fb, data_t *data, drmModeModeInfo *mode) } static void -test_flip_changes_tiling(data_t *data, igt_output_t *output, uint64_t tiling) +test_flip_changes_tiling(data_t *data, igt_output_t *output, uint64_t tiling, int expect) { struct igt_fb linear, tiled; drmModeModeInfo *mode; @@ -107,13 +107,15 @@ test_flip_changes_tiling(data_t *data, igt_output_t *output, uint64_t tiling) /* flip to the linear buffer */ ret = drmModePageFlip(data->drm_fd, output->config.crtc->crtc_id, fb_id, 0, NULL); - igt_assert_eq(ret, 0); + igt_assert_eq(ret, expect); - igt_wait_for_vblank(data->drm_fd, pipe); + if (expect == 0) {I'd still accept ret == 0 since maybe one day it will work happily. So perhaps: if (ret) igt_assert_rq(ret, expect); igt_require(ret == 0); ?
Well would have to at least run the cleanup part before skipping, but even before that I am not sure. That means test would skip today, and who knows for how long in the future, and then soon no one kind of knows what that means - is it good or bad?
Regards, Tvrtko _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
