[igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t 4/8] lib/psr: Make psr_active() only cares about PSR1

[Souza, Jose]

On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 16:16 -0800, Dhinakaran Pandiyan wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-12-04 at 15:09 -0800, José Roberto de Souza wrote:
> > PSR2 will have it own function to detect if is active so we can
> > drop
> > the sleep state search and also to make sure that PSR1 is active
> > lets
> > search for "PSR1 enabled".
> 
> How do you plan to handle PSR2 in kms_frontbuffer_tracking or
> fbt_fbcon? Have new PSR2 sub tests for them?

My plan is have a PSR and PSR2 function to make functions really simple
and easy to read.

> 
> 
> Would it be better to have some sort of PSR state maintained in the
> psr
> library so that the functions know whether to test for PSR1 or PSR2?
> 
> > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
> > Cc: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan at intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: José Roberto de Souza <jose.souza at intel.com>
> > ---
> >  lib/igt_psr.c | 3 ++-
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/lib/igt_psr.c b/lib/igt_psr.c
> > index eecee459..c6d6390f 100644
> > --- a/lib/igt_psr.c
> > +++ b/lib/igt_psr.c
> > @@ -37,7 +37,8 @@ static bool psr_active(int debugfs_fd, bool
> > check_active)
> >  
> >  	active = strstr(buf, "HW Enabled & Active bit: yes\n") ||
> >  		 strstr(buf, "Source PSR ctl: enabled");
> > -	active &= !!(strstr(buf, "SRDENT") || strstr(buf, "SLEEP"));
> > +	active &= !!strstr(buf, "SRDENT");
> > +	active &= !!strstr(buf, "Status: PSR1 enabled");
> >  	return check_active ? active : !active;
> >  }
> >  
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/igt-dev/attachments/20181213/c02484a8/attachment.sig>