dm_test_crtc...invalid_crtc(9)

πŸ“¦ version 7.3.1, in nixpkgs unstable

πŸ’… NAME πŸ’…

dm_test_crtc_get_scanoutpos_invalid_crtc β€” bestie, it literally tests that an invalid CRTC returns -EINVAL

So this is one page in the Kernel API Manual (that's the manual name, hi, welcome) and it's a whole vibe check for one single KUnit test. The test passes in a bad CRTC and expects the kernel to go "nope, -EINVAL" β€” and honestly? Slay. Validation is self-care. πŸŽ€


✨ SYNOPSIS ✨

void dm_test_crtc_get_scanoutpos_invalid_crtc (struct kunit *test );

That's it. One function, one argument, zero drama (the good kind of zero drama). πŸ¦‹


🌸 ARGUMENTS 🌸

  • test β€” The KUnit test context. It's the little ✨situationship✨ object every KUnit test gets handed so it can report pass/fail and keep its own state. Give it the context, it does the test, everyone goes home happy. πŸ’–

πŸ‘‘ SEE ALSO πŸ‘‘

πŸ“ Kernel file

./drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/tests/amdgpu_dm_test.c

🧚 The whole test-suite friend group

Not me listing the ENTIRE extended family, but here we are, and every single one of them ate:


Okay so that's the whole page, no cap. 🫢 Little sign-off for the record: this one lives under the source/version path ./drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/... and it's dated October 2026 β€” so yeah, it's giving future icon, it's giving timeless kernel documentation, and it's giving dm_test_crtc...invalid_crtc(9) forever. πŸ’œβœ¨

πŸ“¦ where this page comes from