From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752279AbdLASBS (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 1 Dec 2017 13:01:18 -0500
Received: from mail-it0-f54.google.com ([209.85.214.54]:34378 "EHLO
        mail-it0-f54.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751104AbdLASBO (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 1 Dec 2017 13:01:14 -0500
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMay1HV/0ROpAJOvHrF2jnfpqvW4F0BAKtuBhXy2jTY/3Z/EnecLVAcuXnTTUO8hKrrBKqtO8g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <151215105956.4852.3393236663014165115@mail.alporthouse.com>
References: <20171201172032.47357-1-seanpaul@chromium.org> <20171201172032.47357-3-seanpaul@chromium.org>
 <151215024280.1324.2765501954695029499@mail.alporthouse.com>
 <CAOw6vbL2Ps8r3-DFK4y5D-sCzpwbKqH=374yq1hGowN-0uagQA@mail.gmail.com>
 <151215091507.4852.2176019139113860843@mail.alporthouse.com> <151215105956.4852.3393236663014165115@mail.alporthouse.com>
From: Sean Paul <seanpaul@chromium.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 13:00:51 -0500
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAOw6vbJTaZ9JPn-hstWe_CoqayBhq-n76gdO8sfK4re4JPv0fg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAOw6vbJTaZ9JPn-hstWe_CoqayBhq-n76gdO8sfK4re4JPv0fg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2 2/8] drm/i915: Add more control to wait_for routines
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 12:57 PM, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> Quoting Chris Wilson (2017-12-01 17:55:15)
>> Quoting Sean Paul (2017-12-01 17:48:17)
>> > On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
>> > > The current wait_for() is a little more complicated nowadays (variable
>> > > W).
>> > >
>> >
>> > Hmm, am I based off the wrong tree? I'm using drm-intel-next.
>>
>> drm-intel-next is what was sent as a PR; drm-intel-next-queued is always
>> current. To be sure CI, doesn't complain about merge conflicts, base on
>> drm-tip.
>

Ahhhh, i forgot about -queued. ok, will rebase.

> Speaking of CI, do you have any instructions on how we might set up a
> test system?

I'm working on an igt test for the property now.

>  Just needs a compatible monitor and some test code?

Yep. For testing, I exposed the property via sysfs and fiddle with it that way.

> Could chamelium or something like that be used as a validator?

You would have to implement the receiver side of HDCP on chamelium in
order for this to work. So, probably not.

Sean

> -Chris