Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/i915/gem_lmem_swapping: Fix bug in test_smem_oom

[Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>]

On 2022-04-01 at 12:58:26 +0530, Arjun Melkaveri wrote:
> ctx was not initialized with all physical engines,
> after device reopening.
> This change would resolve assert issue seen in __do_evict.
> 
> v2: Added missing intel_ctx_destroy.
> 
> Cc: Ashutosh Dixit <ashutosh.dixit@intel.com>
> Cc: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Arjun Melkaveri <arjun.melkaveri@intel.com>
> ---
>  tests/i915/gem_lmem_swapping.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_lmem_swapping.c b/tests/i915/gem_lmem_swapping.c
> index 43f0688f..432607b0 100644
> --- a/tests/i915/gem_lmem_swapping.c
> +++ b/tests/i915/gem_lmem_swapping.c
> @@ -428,10 +428,14 @@ static void test_smem_oom(int i915,
>  
>  		fill_params(i915, &params, region, 0, 1, true);
>  
> +		ctx = intel_ctx_create_all_physical(fd);
> +		__gem_context_set_persistence(fd, ctx->id, false);
> +
igt fixture already creates same kind of context and pass it here. Could
we reuse it across all the child and parent processes?

Or we need independed context only?

Ram.

>  		igt_install_exit_handler(smem_oom_exit_handler);
>  		__do_evict(fd, ctx, &region->region, &params,
>  			   params.seed + child + 1);
>  
> +		intel_ctx_destroy(fd, ctx);
>  		close(fd);
>  	}
>  
> -- 
> 2.25.1
>