[PATCH v2] drm/tests: Add KUnit tests for drm_mode_create_dvi_i_properties()

[Maxime Ripard]

Hi,

On Sat, Nov 11, 2023 at 12:54:53AM +0530, Dipam Turkar wrote:
> Introduce unit tests for the drm_mode_create_dvi_i_properties() function to ensure
> the proper creation of DVI-I specific connector properties.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dipam Turkar <dipamt1729 at gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_connector_test.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 38 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_connector_test.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_connector_test.c
> index c66aa2dc8d9d..9ac1fd32c579 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_connector_test.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_connector_test.c
> @@ -4,6 +4,9 @@
>   */
>  
>  #include <drm/drm_connector.h>
> +#include <drm/drm_device.h>
> +#include <drm/drm_drv.h>
> +#include <drm/drm_kunit_helpers.h>
>  
>  #include <kunit/test.h>
>  
> @@ -58,6 +61,30 @@ static void drm_test_get_tv_mode_from_name_truncated(struct kunit *test)
>  	KUNIT_EXPECT_LT(test, ret, 0);
>  };
>  
> +/*
> + * Test that drm_mode_create_dvi_i_properties() succeeds and
> + * DVI-I subconnector and select subconectors properties have
> + * been created.
> + */
> +static void drm_test_mode_create_dvi_i_properties(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> +	struct drm_device *drm;
> +	struct device *dev;
> +
> +	dev = drm_kunit_helper_alloc_device(test);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, dev);
> +
> +	drm = __drm_kunit_helper_alloc_drm_device(test, dev, sizeof(*drm), 0, DRIVER_MODESET);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, drm);
> +
> +	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, drm_mode_create_dvi_i_properties(drm), 0);
> +	KUNIT_EXPECT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, drm->mode_config.dvi_i_select_subconnector_property);
> +	KUNIT_EXPECT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, drm->mode_config.dvi_i_subconnector_property);
> +
> +	// Expect the function to return 0 if called twice.

This is not the proper comment format

> +	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, drm_mode_create_dvi_i_properties(drm), 0);

This should be in a separate test, with a separate description. We want
to test two things: that the function works well, and that the function
still works if we call it a second time.

> +}
> +
>  static struct kunit_case drm_get_tv_mode_from_name_tests[] = {
>  	KUNIT_CASE_PARAM(drm_test_get_tv_mode_from_name_valid,
>  			 drm_get_tv_mode_from_name_valid_gen_params),
> @@ -70,7 +97,18 @@ static struct kunit_suite drm_get_tv_mode_from_name_test_suite = {
>  	.test_cases = drm_get_tv_mode_from_name_tests,
>  };

The test should be next to the test suite definition

> +static struct kunit_case drm_connector_tests[] = {
> +	KUNIT_CASE(drm_test_mode_create_dvi_i_properties),
> +	{ }
> +};
> +
> +static struct kunit_suite drm_connector_test_suite = {
> +	.name = "drm_connector",

That's too generic, the test suite is only about
drm_mode_create_dvi_i_properties(), not drm_connector in general.

> +	.test_cases = drm_connector_tests,
> +};
> +
>  kunit_test_suite(drm_get_tv_mode_from_name_test_suite);
> +kunit_test_suite(drm_connector_test_suite);

kunit_test_suites

Maxime
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20231128/fee33634/attachment.sig>