[igt-dev] [i-g-t 01/51] lib/igt_kms: Add a helper for igt test constraint

[Modem, Bhanuprakash]

On Mon-15-08-2022 03:19 pm, Petri Latvala wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2022 at 11:38:18PM +0530, Bhanuprakash Modem wrote:
>> This patch will create a helper with super set of all test constraints.
>>
>> Example:
>> * Pipe-D can't support mode > 5K
>> * To use 8K mode on a pipe then consecutive pipe must be available & free.
>> * MSO is supported only on PIPE_A/PIPE_B.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bhanuprakash Modem <bhanuprakash.modem at intel.com>
>> ---
>>   lib/igt_kms.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   lib/igt_kms.h |  1 +
>>   2 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/igt_kms.c b/lib/igt_kms.c
>> index 1ba3bd2a..e1a65244 100644
>> --- a/lib/igt_kms.c
>> +++ b/lib/igt_kms.c
>> @@ -5803,3 +5803,25 @@ bool igt_parse_mode_string(const char *mode_string, drmModeModeInfo *mode)
>>   
>>   	return true;
>>   }
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * igt_test_constraint:
>> + * @display: a pointer to an #igt_display_t structure
>> + *
>> + * Get all active pipes from connected outputs (i.e. pending_pipe != PIPE_NONE)
>> + * and check those pipes supports the selected mode(s).
>> + *
>> + * This is a super set of all test constraints.
>> + *
>> + * Example:
>> + *  * Pipe-D can't support mode > 5K
>> + *  * To use 8K mode on a pipe then consecutive pipe must be free.
>> + *  * MSO is supported only on PIPE_A/PIPE_B.
>> + *
>> + * Returns: true if a valid crtc/connector mode combo found, else false
> 
> "all test constraints" sounds very broad, with very implied
> specifics. Please write the specifics so potential users can easily
> see if they need to call this function or not. Is this meant to be for
> all kms testing, or just for bigjoiner-related hardware limitations?

Our intention is that all kms tests should use this helper to decide 
whether to run/skip the subtest. But for now, I can see that only 
hardware/configuration-related limitations like Bigjoiner/MSO can go 
through this helper.

> 
> Speaking of hardware limitations, this sounds very intel-specific but
> the documentation (or the code) doesn't specify. Same comment goes for
> the function igt_check_bigjoiner_support, even though that's already
> merged.

Agreed, we need a check for i915 device as above mentioned limitations 
are intel-specific.

- Bhanu

> 
>