All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ghimiray, Himal Prasad" <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
To: "Gupta, Anshuman" <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>,
	"igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org" <igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org>
Cc: "Brost, Matthew" <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
	"Nilawar, Badal" <badal.nilawar@intel.com>,
	"Tauro, Riana" <riana.tauro@intel.com>,
	"Poosa, Karthik" <karthik.poosa@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH i-g-t 1/2] Revert "tests/intel/xe_pm_residency: Add an assertion on MI_STORE execution time"
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 09:17:14 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5f774c6f-e9bd-4c71-9606-bd2ff0117873@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CY5PR11MB6211966D197F77629AC4C209957E2@CY5PR11MB6211.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>



On 08-10-2024 08:52, Gupta, Anshuman wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ghimiray, Himal Prasad <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 8:44 AM
>> To: Gupta, Anshuman <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>; igt-
>> dev@lists.freedesktop.org
>> Cc: Brost, Matthew <matthew.brost@intel.com>; Nilawar, Badal
>> <badal.nilawar@intel.com>; Tauro, Riana <riana.tauro@intel.com>; Poosa,
>> Karthik <karthik.poosa@intel.com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH i-g-t 1/2] Revert "tests/intel/xe_pm_residency: Add an
>> assertion on MI_STORE execution time"
>>
>>
>>
>> On 08-10-2024 07:31, Gupta, Anshuman wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Ghimiray, Himal Prasad <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
>>>> Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 10:54 PM
>>>> To: igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
>>>> Cc: Ghimiray, Himal Prasad <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>; Brost,
>>>> Matthew <matthew.brost@intel.com>; Nilawar, Badal
>>>> <badal.nilawar@intel.com>; Tauro, Riana <riana.tauro@intel.com>;
>>>> Gupta, Anshuman <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>; Poosa, Karthik
>>>> <karthik.poosa@intel.com>
>>>> Subject: [PATCH i-g-t 1/2] Revert "tests/intel/xe_pm_residency: Add
>>>> an assertion on MI_STORE execution time"
>>>>
>>>> The reported time does not reflect the completion time of
>>>> MI_STORE_DWORD; instead, it accounts for the delay in the scheduler.
>>>> Therefore, it represents the time taken between xe_exec and syncobj_wait.
>>>    igt_assert(syncobj_wait(fd, &syncobj, 1, INT64_MAX, 0, NULL));
>>> elapsed = igt_nsec_elapsed(&tv); elapsed is taken right after the
>>> syncobj_wait() therefore it represent the time taken by xe_exec +
>> syncobj_wait, total time taken for completion of job.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Anshuman.
>>
>>
>> That's true, while writing "time taken between xe_exec and syncobj_wait"
>> , I meant to convey in between start of xe_exec and syncobj_wait completion.
>> Will rephrase commit message before pushing.
> Why do we want to remove assertion ? We don't want to write IGT to make CI happy it is to catch the bugs in KMD. Even in this case as well this is a bug from Linux Kernel.
> I don't agree with removal of assertion.

Few issues with this assertion.

1) IGT has --inactivity-timeout of 90 sec, which means you will not hit 
this assertion ever and SIGQUIT will be called if time between start of 
xe_exec and syncobj completion is ~0.9 sec.

2) Even 0.9 sec of delay is something huge for kernel. So why IGT 
assumes anything less than 1.2 sec is safe. Isn't it just to make 99% of 
idle time safe.

This assertion solves no purpose, if IGT silently passes for anything 
less than 1.2 sec, assume 1.1sec (Isn't it huge delay for wq submission).


BR
Himal


> Thanks,
> Anshuman.
>>
>> Thanks for pointing this.
>>
>> Himal
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> This reverts commit 92825ed72be61c5419d95db944fef1c9dda2215a.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Riana Tauro <riana.tauro@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Karthik Poosa <karthik.poosa@intel.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Himal Prasad Ghimiray
>>>> <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    tests/intel/xe_pm_residency.c | 9 ---------
>>>>    1 file changed, 9 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tests/intel/xe_pm_residency.c
>>>> b/tests/intel/xe_pm_residency.c index 772fe9b57..f4d05889c 100644
>>>> --- a/tests/intel/xe_pm_residency.c
>>>> +++ b/tests/intel/xe_pm_residency.c
>>>> @@ -144,15 +144,6 @@ static void exec_load(int fd, struct
>>>> drm_xe_engine_class_instance *hwe, unsigned
>>>>    			  1e-3 * submit,
>>>>    			  1e-3 * (elapsed - submit));
>>>>
>>>> -		/*
>>>> -		 * MI_STORE_DWORD generally completes within couple of
>>>> ms.
>>>> -		 * Assert if it takes more than 1.2 seconds, as it will cause
>>>> -		 * IGT test to timeout due to sleep of 120 seconds which is
>>>> -		 * the current per test timeout. Currently there is no way to
>>>> -		 * read this timeout from IGT test.
>>>> -		 */
>>>> -		igt_assert((uint64_t)elapsed < (uint64_t)(1.2 *
>>>> NSEC_PER_SEC));
>>>> -
>>>>    		syncobj_reset(fd, &syncobj, 1);
>>>>
>>>>    		/*
>>>> --
>>>> 2.34.1
>>>
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2024-10-08  3:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-10-07 17:23 [PATCH i-g-t 1/2] Revert "tests/intel/xe_pm_residency: Add an assertion on MI_STORE execution time" Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-10-07 17:23 ` [PATCH i-g-t 2/2] tests/intel/xe_pm_residency: Limit max usleep time to 50sec Himal Prasad Ghimiray
2024-10-07 17:32   ` Cavitt, Jonathan
2024-10-08  4:13     ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-10-08  4:13   ` Poosa, Karthik
2024-10-07 17:31 ` [PATCH i-g-t 1/2] Revert "tests/intel/xe_pm_residency: Add an assertion on MI_STORE execution time" Cavitt, Jonathan
2024-10-14 10:38   ` Gupta, Anshuman
2024-10-07 21:31 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for series starting with [i-g-t,1/2] " Patchwork
2024-10-07 21:36 ` ✓ CI.xeBAT: " Patchwork
2024-10-08  2:01 ` [PATCH i-g-t 1/2] " Gupta, Anshuman
2024-10-08  3:13   ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad
2024-10-08  3:22     ` Gupta, Anshuman
2024-10-08  3:47       ` Ghimiray, Himal Prasad [this message]
2024-10-08  4:47         ` Poosa, Karthik
2024-10-08  5:00           ` Poosa, Karthik
2024-10-08  8:55 ` ✗ CI.xeFULL: failure for series starting with [i-g-t,1/2] " Patchwork
2024-10-08 20:06 ` ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5f774c6f-e9bd-4c71-9606-bd2ff0117873@intel.com \
    --to=himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com \
    --cc=anshuman.gupta@intel.com \
    --cc=badal.nilawar@intel.com \
    --cc=igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=karthik.poosa@intel.com \
    --cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
    --cc=riana.tauro@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.