Hi Sebastian, On Friday, 23 January 2026 12:03:09 CET Sebastian Brzezinka wrote: > Hi Janusz, > > On Wed Jan 21, 2026 at 12:42 PM CET, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote: > > In addition to properties and attributes obtained from udev, print > > functions also list some library specific attributes: drm_card, > > drm_render and codename. Those not necessarily make sense for PCIe > > bridge upstream ports that follow their PCI GPU devices on the listing. > > Skip them. > > > > Signed-off-by: Janusz Krzysztofik <[email protected]> > > --- > > lib/igt_device_scan.c | 8 ++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/lib/igt_device_scan.c b/lib/igt_device_scan.c > > index 7c58ab84e8..e86da001a9 100644 > > --- a/lib/igt_device_scan.c > > +++ b/lib/igt_device_scan.c > > @@ -204,6 +204,7 @@ enum dev_type { > > DEVTYPE_ALL, > > DEVTYPE_INTEGRATED, > > DEVTYPE_DISCRETE, > > + DEVTYPE_BRIDGE, > > }; > > > > #define STR_INTEGRATED "integrated" > > @@ -1055,6 +1056,8 @@ static void update_or_add_parent(struct udev *udev, > > > > bridge_idev = find_or_add_igt_device(udev, bridge_dev, limit_attrs); > > igt_assert(bridge_idev); > > + > > + bridge_idev->dev_type = DEVTYPE_BRIDGE; > > } > > > > static struct igt_device *duplicate_device(struct igt_device *dev) { > > @@ -1313,7 +1316,8 @@ igt_devs_print_simple(struct igt_list_head *view, > > if (is_pci_subsystem(dev)) { > > _pr_simple("vendor", dev->vendor); > > _pr_simple("device", dev->device); > > - _pr_simple("codename", dev->codename); > > + if (dev->dev_type != DEVTYPE_BRIDGE) > > + _pr_simple("codename", dev->codename); > > } > > } > > printf("\n"); > > @@ -1465,7 +1469,7 @@ igt_devs_print_detail(struct igt_list_head *view, > > igt_list_for_each_entry(dev, view, link) { > > printf("========== %s:%s ==========\n", > > dev->subsystem, dev->syspath); > > - if (!is_drm_subsystem(dev)) { > > + if (!is_drm_subsystem(dev) && dev->dev_type != DEVTYPE_BRIDGE) { > > _print_key_value("card device", dev->drm_card); > > _print_key_value("render device", dev->drm_render); > > _print_key_value("codename", dev->codename); > > Could this be merged with patch 7? Most of this will be removed in the next > patch anyway.
If there are no cons from other reviewers for whom that split into two patches, intended to improve their readability, should be better preserved, then yes, I can merge them. Thanks, Janusz > >
