[Intel-gfx] [igt] igt/kms_psr_sink_crc: Fix regression in psr_drrs subtest

[Rodrigo Vivi]

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 01:37:31AM +0000, Radhakrishna Sripada wrote:
> The substring to be matched is modified to reflect kernel code.

Well, technically it is not a regression on psr_drrs because it has
this bug since the beginning ;)

Also this commit message doesn't explain the false positive case
that DK pointed out.

Also this doesn't explain that is safe to use the reverse logic
of !yes because DRRS is only enabled for eDP. Otherwise we would
have to parse specifically the eDP block.

What brings me the question of why do we list all that useless
information on debugfs? :)

> 
> Fixes: 33355210a43e (igt/kms_psr_sink_crc: Add psr_drrs subtest)
> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
> Cc: Dhinakaran Pandiyan <dhinakaran.pandiyan at intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Radhakrishna Sripada <radhakrishna.sripada at intel.com>

Please also CC other folks that are currently working on DRRS..

> ---
>  tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> index 1c25f2c81a34..f023b12c0131 100644
> --- a/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> +++ b/tests/kms_psr_sink_crc.c
> @@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ static bool drrs_disabled(data_t *data)
>  
>  	igt_debugfs_read(data->drm_fd, "i915_drrs_status", buf);
>  
> -	return strstr(buf, "DRRS Support: No\n");
> +	return !strstr(buf, "DRRS Supported: Yes\n");
>  }
>  
>  static void run_test(data_t *data)
> -- 
> 2.9.3
>