2024-01-16 17:46:44

by Michał Winiarski

Subject: [PATCH] drm/tests: mm: Call drm_mm_print in drm_test_mm_debug

The original intent behind the test was to sanity check whether calling
the debug iterator (drm_mm_print) doesn't cause any problems.
Unfortunately - this call got accidentally removed during KUnit
transition. Restore it.

Signed-off-by: Michał Winiarski <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_mm_test.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_mm_test.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_mm_test.c
index 4e9247cf9977f..1eb0c304f9607 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_mm_test.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_mm_test.c
@@ -188,13 +188,13 @@ static void drm_test_mm_init(struct kunit *test)

static void drm_test_mm_debug(struct kunit *test)
{
+ struct drm_printer p = drm_debug_printer(test->name);
struct drm_mm mm;
struct drm_mm_node nodes[2];

/* Create a small drm_mm with a couple of nodes and a few holes, and
* check that the debug iterator doesn't explode over a trivial drm_mm.
*/
-
drm_mm_init(&mm, 0, 4096);

memset(nodes, 0, sizeof(nodes));
@@ -209,6 +209,9 @@ static void drm_test_mm_debug(struct kunit *test)
KUNIT_ASSERT_FALSE_MSG(test, drm_mm_reserve_node(&mm, &nodes[1]),
"failed to reserve node[0] {start=%lld, size=%lld)\n",
nodes[0].start, nodes[0].size);
+
+ drm_mm_print(&mm, &p);
+ KUNIT_SUCCEED(test);
}

static bool expect_insert(struct kunit *test, struct drm_mm *mm,
--
2.43.0

2024-01-17 09:33:29

by Maxime Ripard

Subject: Re: (subset) [PATCH] drm/tests: mm: Call drm_mm_print in drm_test_mm_debug

On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 18:46:02 +0100, Michał Winiarski wrote:
> The original intent behind the test was to sanity check whether calling
> the debug iterator (drm_mm_print) doesn't cause any problems.
> Unfortunately - this call got accidentally removed during KUnit
> transition. Restore it.
>
>

Applied to drm/drm-misc (drm-misc-fixes).

Thanks!
Maxime