On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 02:51:20PM +0200, Ville Syrjälä wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:30:19AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 06:23:44PM +0200, ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Gen2 doesn't have a hardware frame counter, so let's use the sw > > > counter value instead. > > > > > > Testcase: igt/kms_pipe_crc_basic/read-crc-pipe-?-frame-sequence > > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > I think the better test is skip the testcase if all frame numbers are 0. > > Not sure it's worth it to hack this up. > > What's the problem with it? A few extra lines of code? Well the idea of sampling the hw irq counter is that we'd notice when we start missing something. Sampling the baked vblank counter isn't really useful in that regard I think. Otoh we could just sample the official vblank counter, and then a test could schedule a flip for a given frame and check that the crc changes at the right frame (using continuous sampling). That would indeed be useful. This here just looks like a few random changes to appease a fairly arbitrary testcase. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
