Re: [PATCH v2 02/22] drm: Add valid clones check

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Maxime

Gentle reminder on this one.

We are looking for some advice on how to go about KUnit for this static function.

Please help with our question below.

Thanks

Abhinav

On 12/6/2024 4:48 PM, Jessica Zhang wrote:


On 9/25/2024 12:23 AM, Maxime Ripard wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 03:59:18PM GMT, Jessica Zhang wrote:
Check that all encoders attached to a given CRTC are valid
possible_clones of each other.

Signed-off-by: Jessica Zhang <quic_jesszhan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_helper.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_helper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_helper.c
index 43cdf39019a4..cc4001804fdc 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_helper.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_atomic_helper.c
@@ -574,6 +574,25 @@ mode_valid(struct drm_atomic_state *state)
      return 0;
  }
+static int drm_atomic_check_valid_clones(struct drm_atomic_state *state,
+                     struct drm_crtc *crtc)
+{
+    struct drm_encoder *drm_enc;
+    struct drm_crtc_state *crtc_state = drm_atomic_get_new_crtc_state(state,
+                                      crtc);
+
+    drm_for_each_encoder_mask(drm_enc, crtc->dev, crtc_state->encoder_mask) {
+        if ((crtc_state->encoder_mask & drm_enc->possible_clones) !=
+            crtc_state->encoder_mask) {
+            DRM_DEBUG("crtc%d failed valid clone check for mask 0x%x\n",
+                  crtc->base.id, crtc_state->encoder_mask);
+            return -EINVAL;
+        }
+    }
+
+    return 0;
+}
+
  /**
   * drm_atomic_helper_check_modeset - validate state object for modeset changes
   * @dev: DRM device
@@ -745,6 +764,10 @@ drm_atomic_helper_check_modeset(struct drm_device *dev,
          ret = drm_atomic_add_affected_planes(state, crtc);
          if (ret != 0)
              return ret;
+
+        ret = drm_atomic_check_valid_clones(state, crtc);
+        if (ret != 0)
+            return ret;
      }

Pretty much the same comment, we should have kunit tests for this.

Hey Maxime,

I'm working on the kunit test for this and had a question on the design for the unit test:

Since this is a static helper that returns a pretty common error code, how would you recommend going about making sure that `drm_atomic_check_valid_clones()` specifically is returning the error (and not a different part of check_modeset) when testing the check_valid_clones() failure path?

Thanks,

Jessica Zhang


Maxime





[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux