On 07/06/2023 13:35, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On 29/05/2023 10:50, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>> Add a very simple test for
>> VIDIOC_SUBDEV_G_ROUTING/VIDIOC_SUBDEV_S_ROUTING.
>>
>> We can't (at least at the moment) really know here what kind of routings
>> the driver would accept, but we can test a VIDIOC_SUBDEV_G_ROUTING call,
>> followed by a VIDIOC_SUBDEV_S_ROUTING call with the routing we
>> received.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Reviewed-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp | 12 ++++++++++++
>> utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.h | 1 +
>> utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>> 3 files changed, 29 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
>> index d7c10482..f082f569 100644
>> --- a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
>> +++ b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.cpp
>> @@ -1249,6 +1249,18 @@ void testNode(struct node &node, struct node &node_m2m_cap, struct node &expbuf_
>> node.is_passthrough_subdev = has_source && has_sink;
>>
>> if (has_routes) {
>> + printf("Sub-Device routing ioctls:\n");
>> +
>> + for (unsigned which = V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_TRY;
>> + which <= V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_ACTIVE; which++) {
>> +
>> + printf("\ttest %s VIDIOC_SUBDEV_G_ROUTING/VIDIOC_SUBDEV_S_ROUTING: %s\n",
>> + which ? "Active" : "Try",
>> + ok(testSubDevRouting(&node, which)));
>> + }
>> +
>> + printf("\n");
>> +
>> for (unsigned which = V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_TRY;
>> which <= V4L2_SUBDEV_FORMAT_ACTIVE; which++) {
>>
>> diff --git a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.h b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.h
>> index 0cd43980..35b2274b 100644
>> --- a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.h
>> +++ b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-compliance.h
>> @@ -375,6 +375,7 @@ int testSubDevEnum(struct node *node, unsigned which, unsigned pad, unsigned str
>> int testSubDevFormat(struct node *node, unsigned which, unsigned pad, unsigned stream);
>> int testSubDevSelection(struct node *node, unsigned which, unsigned pad, unsigned stream);
>> int testSubDevFrameInterval(struct node *node, unsigned pad, unsigned stream);
>> +int testSubDevRouting(struct node *node, unsigned which);
>>
>> // Buffer ioctl tests
>> int testReqBufs(struct node *node);
>> diff --git a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp
>> index 07192bda..962d9244 100644
>> --- a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp
>> +++ b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-subdevs.cpp
>> @@ -551,3 +551,19 @@ int testSubDevSelection(struct node *node, unsigned which, unsigned pad, unsigne
>>
>> return have_sel ? 0 : ENOTTY;
>> }
>> +
>> +int testSubDevRouting(struct node *node, unsigned which)
>> +{
>> + struct v4l2_subdev_routing routing = {};
>> + struct v4l2_subdev_route routes[256] = {};
>
> NUM_ROUTES_MAX
>
>> +
>> + routing.which = which;
>> + routing.routes = (__u64)&routes;
>> + routing.num_routes = 256;
>
> NUM_ROUTES_MAX
Actually, you should also test the corner cases of NUM_ROUTES_MAX + 1
(that should fail, right?) and setting num_routes to 0 and check that
ENOSPC is returned and num_routes is updated.
Also verify that 'reserved' is zeroed (i.e. set it to 0xff here, then
check for 0 after the ioctl).
Regards,
Hans
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans
>
>> +
>> + fail_on_test(doioctl(node, VIDIOC_SUBDEV_G_ROUTING, &routing));
>> +
>> + fail_on_test(doioctl(node, VIDIOC_SUBDEV_S_ROUTING, &routing));
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>
