Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Jun 2020 13:36:13 +0900
To:     Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@xs4all.nl>
Cc:     Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@cisco.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 03/14] videobuf2: handle V4L2 buffer cache flags
Message-ID: <20200604043613.GA98819@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
References: <20200514160153.3646-1-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <20200514160153.3646-4-sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
 <b34ae09b-7c20-7255-6adc-3370680555cd@xs4all.nl>
 <CAAFQd5Cu5ex=YcuVfmEC1uNA4DZBSAF04LYtrw3-q22ZMc7_DA@mail.gmail.com>
 <cfb54bb3-a7dd-fafd-6b33-5500d6728a8f@xs4all.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <cfb54bb3-a7dd-fafd-6b33-5500d6728a8f@xs4all.nl>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On (20/06/02 14:24), Hans Verkuil wrote:
[..]
> For vim2m (but looks the same for vivid/vimc/vicodec):
> 
> Streaming ioctls:
>         test read/write: OK (Not Supported)
>         test blocking wait: OK
>         Video Capture: Captured 8 buffers
>         test MMAP (no poll): OK
>         Video Capture: Captured 8 buffers
>         test MMAP (select): OK
>         Video Capture: Captured 8 buffers
>         test MMAP (epoll): OK
>         Video Capture: Captured 8 buffers
>         test USERPTR (no poll): OK
>         Video Capture: Captured 8 buffers
>         test USERPTR (select): OK
>                 fail: v4l2-test-buffers.cpp(1874): flags & V4L2_BUF_FLAG_NO_CACHE_INVALIDATE
>                 fail: v4l2-test-buffers.cpp(1937): setupDmaBuf(expbuf_node, node, q, exp_q)
>         test DMABUF (no poll): FAIL
>                 fail: v4l2-test-buffers.cpp(1874): flags & V4L2_BUF_FLAG_NO_CACHE_INVALIDATE
>                 fail: v4l2-test-buffers.cpp(1937): setupDmaBuf(expbuf_node, node, q, exp_q)
>         test DMABUF (select): FAIL

This helps. I'm probably "holding v4l2-compliance wrong", but I have
never seen that assertion triggering. The fix should be easy enough

---

diff --git a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-buffers.cpp b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-buffers.cpp
index 79b74e96..1ee12f96 100644
--- a/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-buffers.cpp
+++ b/utils/v4l2-compliance/v4l2-test-buffers.cpp
@@ -1871,8 +1871,8 @@ static int setupDmaBuf(struct node *expbuf_node, struct node *node,
 				fail_on_test(!buf.g_bytesused(p));
 		}
 		flags = buf.g_flags();
-		fail_on_test(flags & V4L2_BUF_FLAG_NO_CACHE_INVALIDATE);
-		fail_on_test(flags & V4L2_BUF_FLAG_NO_CACHE_CLEAN);
+		fail_on_test(!(flags & V4L2_BUF_FLAG_NO_CACHE_INVALIDATE));
+		fail_on_test(!(flags & V4L2_BUF_FLAG_NO_CACHE_CLEAN));
 		fail_on_test(flags & V4L2_BUF_FLAG_DONE);
 		fail_on_test(buf.querybuf(node, i));
 		fail_on_test(buf.check(q, Queued, i));