dm_test_dmu...nit_dmcu_abm(9)

πŸ“¦ version 7.3.1, in nixpkgs unstable

πŸŽ€ dm_test_dmub_hw_init_dmcu_abm πŸŽ€

okay so this is a page from the Kernel API Manual (yes, that manual, the big one πŸ’…) and it's literally about one very specific KUnit test. she's niche, she's precise, she's everything. let's get into it bestie πŸ¦‹


🌸 NAME 🌸

dm_test_dmub_hw_init_dmcu_abm β€” the test that checks hw init actually initializes DMCU and ABM when they're present 🫢


✨ SYNOPSIS ✨

void dm_test_dmub_hw_init_dmcu_abm (struct kunit *test );

that's it. that's the whole signature. short king πŸ‘‘


πŸ’– ARGUMENTS πŸ’–

  • test β€” the KUnit test context πŸ§ͺ she's the one holding the keys to the whole test, no cap

πŸ”₯ DESCRIPTION πŸ”₯

so here's the vibe: when the resource pool actually exposes a DMCU and an ABM (like, they're really there, not just a maybe), then dm_dmub_hw_init is supposed to do three things, bestie, and we're checking all three:

  1. program the PSP version ⭐
  2. invoke the DMCU init callback πŸŽ€
  3. record the running state that the DMCU reported πŸ‘‘

three for three or it's not slaying, periodt πŸ’…


πŸ¦‹ SEE ALSO πŸ¦‹

the whole friend group showed up for this one, and honestly? iconic πŸ’œ

Kernel file

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

the rest of the crew (all in section 9):

like I said. everyone was invited 🌈


ngl this is a test page, so if you're here looking for runtime behaviour you're in the wrong group chat β€” this is about verifying that dm_dmub_hw_init does the right things in a test πŸ’€

okay that's the whole page, bestie, you ate that πŸ“ mwah πŸ’–

β€” with love from ./drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/..., dated October 2026, signed dm_test_dmu...nit_dmcu_abm(9) πŸ§šβ€β™€οΈβœ¨

πŸ“¦ where this page comes from