[igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v2] tests/kms_plane_scaling: Increase buffer size if driver doesn't support larger scale factors

[Jessica Zhang]

On 12/9/2021 3:26 AM, Petri Latvala wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2021 at 04:27:16PM -0800, Jessica Zhang wrote:
>> Catch edge cases where driver doesn't support larger scale factors or
>> pipe doesn't support scaling.
>>
>> Currently, a 20x20 framebuffer is passed in to be upscaled. However,
>> this will cause issues with other drivers as they may not support larger
>> scale factors or may not support scaling at all for certain planes.
>>
>> This avoids failures due to invalid scale factor by trying
>> the original 20x20 framebuffer commit, then trying to commit larger
>> framebuffers up to and including unity scale.
>>
>> Changes since V1:
>> - try_commit_with_fb_size: Changed igt_try_commit2 to
>>    igt_display_try_commit_atomic instead to avoid redundant commits
>> - try_commit_with_fb_size: Moved calls to clear framebuffer to outside
>>    of success condition and moved cleanup_crtc back to outside of method
>>
>> Tested-on: Qualcomm RB5 (sdm845)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jessica Zhang <quic_jesszhan at quicinc.com>
>> ---
>>   tests/kms_plane_scaling.c | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>>   1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/kms_plane_scaling.c b/tests/kms_plane_scaling.c
>> index 85db11ee..971c1532 100644
>> --- a/tests/kms_plane_scaling.c
>> +++ b/tests/kms_plane_scaling.c
>> @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
>>   /*
>>    * Copyright © 2013,2014 Intel Corporation
>> + * Copyright (c) 2021 Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. All rights reserved.
>>    *
>>    * Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a
>>    * copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"),
>> @@ -118,6 +119,32 @@ static void prepare_crtc(data_t *data, igt_output_t *output, enum pipe pipe,
>>   	igt_display_commit2(display, COMMIT_ATOMIC);
>>   }
>>   
>> +static int try_commit_with_fb_size(int width, int height, igt_rotation_t rot,
>> +		                            igt_display_t *display, data_t *d,
>> +                                   igt_plane_t *plane,
>> +		                            drmModeModeInfo *mode)
>> +{
>> +	int ret;
>> +
>> +	/* Check min to full resolution upscaling */
>> +	igt_fb_set_position(&d->fb[0], plane, 0, 0);
>> +	igt_fb_set_size(&d->fb[0], plane, width, height);
>> +	igt_plane_set_position(plane, 0, 0);
>> +	igt_plane_set_size(plane, mode->hdisplay, mode->vdisplay);
>> +	igt_plane_set_rotation(plane, rot);
>> +
>> +	ret = igt_display_try_commit_atomic(display, DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_TEST_ONLY |
>> +		                                DRM_MODE_ATOMIC_ALLOW_MODESET, NULL);
>> +
>> +	if (!ret)
>> +		igt_display_commit2(display, COMMIT_ATOMIC);
> 
> Now this looks more understandable but I still have one "why"
> remaining: Why test_only the commit if you're anyway going to perform
> the commit? You could just have this as one try_commit, without
> test_only, and let it perform it, as there's nothing done differently
> here based on success/failure.
> 
The original intention was to test that a commit will go through before 
actually doing the commit. This way, the test would be more optimized 
since we would only perform a commit when we know it will succeed. 
Otherwise, in a worst case scenario, we'd be performing 3 or 4 commits 
per pipe/format for a subtest like pipe-*-scaler-with-pixel-format.

Thanks,
Jessica Zhang
> 
>