On Sat, Dec 23, 2023 at 03:59:33PM +0530, Dipam Turkar wrote:
> I needed some help regarding introducing a separate test for testing if the
> function still works if called a second time as suggested. Wouldn't we need
> to call it on the same object we called in the first time. So, that will
>
I needed some help regarding introducing a separate test for testing if the
function still works if called a second time as suggested. Wouldn't we need
to call it on the same object we called in the first time. So, that will
bring redundancy in the two functions. Is this correct? Or am I
Will work on that.
Dipam Turkar
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 8:39 PM Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Nov 11, 2023 at 12:54:53AM +0530, Dipam Turkar wrote:
> > Introduce unit tests for the drm_mode_create_dvi_i_properties() function
> to ensure
> > the proper creation of DVI-I specific
Hi,
On Sat, Nov 11, 2023 at 12:54:53AM +0530, Dipam Turkar wrote:
> Introduce unit tests for the drm_mode_create_dvi_i_properties() function to
> ensure
> the proper creation of DVI-I specific connector properties.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dipam Turkar
> ---
>
Dipam Turkar writes:
Hello Dipam,
> Introduce unit tests for the drm_mode_create_dvi_i_properties() function to
> ensure
> the proper creation of DVI-I specific connector properties.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dipam Turkar
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_connector_test.c | 38
Introduce unit tests for the drm_mode_create_dvi_i_properties() function to
ensure
the proper creation of DVI-I specific connector properties.
Signed-off-by: Dipam Turkar
---
drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_connector_test.c | 38 ++
1 file changed, 38 insertions(+)
diff --git
