[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] igt/kms_universal_plane: Flush pending cleanups

[Maarten Lankhorst]

Op 28-06-18 om 13:34 schreef Chris Wilson:
> Quoting Maarten Lankhorst (2018-06-28 12:25:18)
>> Op 28-06-18 om 13:16 schreef Chris Wilson:
>>> Quoting Maarten Lankhorst (2018-06-28 12:06:35)
>>>> Op 28-06-18 om 12:51 schreef Chris Wilson:
>>>>> drm_atomic_helper allows for up to one outstanding cleanup task to be in
>>>>> flight before a new modeset (see stall_commit in stall_checks()), In
>>>>> lieu of hooking up a debugfs to force flushing of the outstanding work,
>>>>> submit enough blocking modesets to ensure that the pending work is
>>>>> completed before continuing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>>>> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst at linux.intel.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  tests/kms_universal_plane.c | 1 +
>>>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/tests/kms_universal_plane.c b/tests/kms_universal_plane.c
>>>>> index 58f329e68..f875fd194 100644
>>>>> --- a/tests/kms_universal_plane.c
>>>>> +++ b/tests/kms_universal_plane.c
>>>>> @@ -638,6 +638,7 @@ cursor_leak_test_pipe(data_t *data, enum pipe pipe, igt_output_t *output)
>>>>>       igt_plane_set_fb(primary, NULL);
>>>>>       igt_plane_set_fb(cursor, NULL);
>>>>>       igt_display_commit2(display, COMMIT_LEGACY);
>>>>> +     igt_display_commit2(display, COMMIT_LEGACY);
>>>>>       cursor_leak_test_fini(data, output, &background_fb, cursor_fb);
>>>>>  
>>>>>       /* We should be back to the same framebuffer count as when we started */
>>>> This won't work, we won't commit anything without anything changed, probably best to put the set_fb in the loop too.
>>> Fill in the details above. :-p
>>>
>>> Is that igt or the kernel? I have this belief that when I ask it to do
>>> something, it should ;)
>>>
>>> igt_display_commit3(display, COMMIT_LEGACY, DOIT);
>>> -Chris
>> But you didn't tell it to do anything, nothing changed from last commit, so nothing gets committed.
> But I want it to reapply the commit I built up. That's how I think of
> it, since I'm used to a stateless API.
> -Chris

But there's nothing to apply, the commit is already applied.

That's how the api has always worked, at least. :)

~Maarten