From: "Dixit, Ashutosh" <ashutosh.dixit@intel.com>
To: John Harrison <john.c.harrison@intel.com>
Cc: IGT-Dev@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org, Intel-GFX@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org
Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/i915: Skip gem_exec_fair on GuC based platforms
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 20:21:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <878rywi95o.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2981474c-7bbc-c76f-6035-f8643f2be547@intel.com>
On Wed, 13 Oct 2021 18:07:05 -0700, John Harrison wrote:
>
> On 10/13/2021 15:53, Dixit, Ashutosh wrote:
> >> diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c b/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c
> >> index ef5a450f6..ca9c73c6e 100644
> >> --- a/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c
> >> +++ b/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c
> >> @@ -1314,6 +1314,12 @@ igt_main
> >> igt_require(gem_scheduler_enabled(i915));
> >> igt_require(gem_scheduler_has_ctx_priority(i915));
> >>
> >> + /*
> >> + * These tests are for a specific scheduling model which is
> >> + * not currently implemented by GuC. So skip on GuC platforms.
> >> + */
> >> + igt_require(intel_gen(intel_get_drm_devid(i915)) < 12);
> > Probably a feature check rather than a version check is better? Can we use
> > say gem_has_guc_submission() instead?
> >
> > Though appears gem_has_guc_submission() only checks if guc submission is
> > available, not if it is actually in use (unless guc will used when
> > available automatically)? Is it possible to add the check if guc submission
> > is actually in use? Or a check for guc scheduler?
>
> I believe this has come up a few times before. My understanding is that no,
> there is no current official/safe way for userland to check if GuC
> submission is enabled (you can read some of the debugfs files and make an
> educated guess but that isn't exactly an official interface). And the
> answer was that it isn't worth adding a UAPI specifically for it. Not least
> because it would be a UAPI solely for use by IGT which is not allowed.
Hmm, so kernel will use GuC submission if bit 0 of enable_guc module param
is 1, correct? Which is what gem_has_guc_submission() checks, though I
guess we can also add a function gem_using_guc_submission() which is
basically an alias for gem_has_guc_submission(). So we can't do this? Or
the module param is not an acceptable uapi? But we already introduced
gem_has_guc_submission()?
I think this kind of a generation/version check should be implemented in
the kernel. If kernel wants to turn on GuC submission by default let it do
that and set enable_guc. In IGT we just check enable_guc. No? Thanks.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Dixit, Ashutosh" <ashutosh.dixit@intel.com>
To: John Harrison <john.c.harrison@intel.com>
Cc: <IGT-Dev@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org>, <Intel-GFX@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/i915: Skip gem_exec_fair on GuC based platforms
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 20:21:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <878rywi95o.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2981474c-7bbc-c76f-6035-f8643f2be547@intel.com>
On Wed, 13 Oct 2021 18:07:05 -0700, John Harrison wrote:
>
> On 10/13/2021 15:53, Dixit, Ashutosh wrote:
> >> diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c b/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c
> >> index ef5a450f6..ca9c73c6e 100644
> >> --- a/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c
> >> +++ b/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c
> >> @@ -1314,6 +1314,12 @@ igt_main
> >> igt_require(gem_scheduler_enabled(i915));
> >> igt_require(gem_scheduler_has_ctx_priority(i915));
> >>
> >> + /*
> >> + * These tests are for a specific scheduling model which is
> >> + * not currently implemented by GuC. So skip on GuC platforms.
> >> + */
> >> + igt_require(intel_gen(intel_get_drm_devid(i915)) < 12);
> > Probably a feature check rather than a version check is better? Can we use
> > say gem_has_guc_submission() instead?
> >
> > Though appears gem_has_guc_submission() only checks if guc submission is
> > available, not if it is actually in use (unless guc will used when
> > available automatically)? Is it possible to add the check if guc submission
> > is actually in use? Or a check for guc scheduler?
>
> I believe this has come up a few times before. My understanding is that no,
> there is no current official/safe way for userland to check if GuC
> submission is enabled (you can read some of the debugfs files and make an
> educated guess but that isn't exactly an official interface). And the
> answer was that it isn't worth adding a UAPI specifically for it. Not least
> because it would be a UAPI solely for use by IGT which is not allowed.
Hmm, so kernel will use GuC submission if bit 0 of enable_guc module param
is 1, correct? Which is what gem_has_guc_submission() checks, though I
guess we can also add a function gem_using_guc_submission() which is
basically an alias for gem_has_guc_submission(). So we can't do this? Or
the module param is not an acceptable uapi? But we already introduced
gem_has_guc_submission()?
I think this kind of a generation/version check should be implemented in
the kernel. If kernel wants to turn on GuC submission by default let it do
that and set enable_guc. In IGT we just check enable_guc. No? Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-14 3:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-13 22:43 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/i915: Skip gem_exec_fair on GuC based platforms John.C.Harrison
2021-10-13 22:53 ` [igt-dev] " Dixit, Ashutosh
2021-10-13 22:53 ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2021-10-14 1:07 ` John Harrison
2021-10-14 1:07 ` John Harrison
2021-10-14 3:21 ` Dixit, Ashutosh [this message]
2021-10-14 3:21 ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2021-10-13 23:38 ` [igt-dev] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2021-10-14 1:04 ` [igt-dev] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2021-10-14 7:45 ` [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] " Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-10-14 7:45 ` [Intel-gfx] " Tvrtko Ursulin
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=878rywi95o.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com \
--to=ashutosh.dixit@intel.com \
--cc=IGT-Dev@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org \
--cc=Intel-GFX@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org \
--cc=john.c.harrison@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.