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