On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 05:16:08PM +0000, Lionel Landwerlin wrote: > Hi, > > This series enables testing pipe level color management using kernel patches > from this serie : > > https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/2720/ > > Most of the tests use pipe CRCs to check the results by comparing the output > with the expected output drawn using cairo. These tests look good. The only thing that might be worth adding is a test that intermixes the legacy gamma ioctl with full color management use. I believe invoking the legacy ioctl should clear the degamma and CTM, right? It might be worth checking that that actually happens. Also, there was one misplaced patch hunk that I called out on patch 2/3. Aside from the final IGT tweaks, I think we're pretty close to merging. Here are the final opens I see: * I expect we'll just merge this whole thing through the Intel tree, even though patch #3 adds the properties, structures, and helpers to the DRM core, so we need to get an okay from airlied. Dave, do you have any concerns about this? * I know the ChromeOS guys have been reviewing this series independently on their end and putting together the userspace (open source) which will be using this. We should get someone to formally Ack this on their behalf; I think Rob Bradford has been working with them; adding him to the Cc list to see if he can provide the Ack. * I'm not sure if I ever saw a CI report for your final iteration. I may have just missed the email, or it may have never come out due to the temporary FDO downtime or the CI outage last week. Could you provide a pointer to the results (with false positives justified with bugzilla entries), or resubmit again for CI if necessary? * I'm still a little bit uncomfortable that we (the general DRM community) never really came to a consensus on the whole DRM_MODE_PROP_ATOMIC vs not question (both for this patchset and as a general guideline going forward with similar features). Emil had a good argument that if we make something atomic-only to start with, it's trivial to change in the future if we decide we actually want to make use of it with a non-atomic userspace; on the other hand, if we make it unrestricted on day one, that's a change we can't reverse down the line since it becomes part of the ABI. However nobody seemed to really care very strongly either way during the discussion on the color management series, so I'm just putting this here as a final warning in case anyone really wants to see it changed before merging. Thanks! Matt > > Cheers, > > Lionel > > Lionel Landwerlin (5): > lib: kms: add crtc_id to igt_pipe_t > lib: kms: add helpers for color management properties on pipes > lib: fb: add igt_paint_color_gradient_range > lib: add crc comparison function without an assert > tests/kms_color: New test for pipe level color management > > lib/igt_debugfs.c | 17 + > lib/igt_debugfs.h | 1 + > lib/igt_fb.c | 34 ++ > lib/igt_fb.h | 3 + > lib/igt_kms.c | 75 ++++ > lib/igt_kms.h | 18 +- > tests/Makefile.sources | 1 + > tests/kms_pipe_color.c | 1045 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 8 files changed, 1193 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > create mode 100644 tests/kms_pipe_color.c > > -- > 2.7.0 > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx -- Matt Roper Graphics Software Engineer IoTG Platform Enabling & Development Intel Corporation (916) 356-2795 _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
