From: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] i915/gem_workarounds: Verify regs directly
Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 13:15:46 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ef4ho9bh.fsf@gaia.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190529095805.31851-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> writes:
> It seems like the HW validator is getting better at preventing our
> snooping of system registers from non-privileged batches! If we can't
> use SRM, let's probe the register directly through mmio, making sure we
> have the context spinning on the GPU first.
>
> v2: Hold forcewake just in case the spinning batch isn't enough to
> justify our register access.
>
If I recall correctly, either of them separately didn't
work. And there was delay after grabbing the fw before
the register contents appeared. Don't remember the gen tho.
> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110544
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.william.auld@gmail.com>
> ---
> tests/i915/gem_workarounds.c | 88 +++++++-----------------------------
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_workarounds.c b/tests/i915/gem_workarounds.c
> index 44e3dce8a..2767b04d7 100644
> --- a/tests/i915/gem_workarounds.c
> +++ b/tests/i915/gem_workarounds.c
> @@ -80,70 +80,27 @@ static bool write_only(const uint32_t addr)
> return false;
> }
>
> -#define MI_STORE_REGISTER_MEM (0x24 << 23)
> -
> -static int workaround_fail_count(int fd, uint32_t ctx)
> +static int workaround_fail_count(int i915, uint32_t ctx)
> {
> - struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 obj[2];
> - struct drm_i915_gem_relocation_entry *reloc;
> - struct drm_i915_gem_execbuffer2 execbuf;
> - uint32_t result_sz, batch_sz;
> - uint32_t *base, *out;
> - int fail_count = 0;
> -
> - reloc = calloc(num_wa_regs, sizeof(*reloc));
> - igt_assert(reloc);
> -
> - result_sz = 4 * num_wa_regs;
> - result_sz = PAGE_ALIGN(result_sz);
> -
> - batch_sz = 16 * num_wa_regs + 4;
> - batch_sz = PAGE_ALIGN(batch_sz);
> -
> - memset(obj, 0, sizeof(obj));
> - obj[0].handle = gem_create(fd, result_sz);
> - gem_set_caching(fd, obj[0].handle, I915_CACHING_CACHED);
> - obj[1].handle = gem_create(fd, batch_sz);
> - obj[1].relocs_ptr = to_user_pointer(reloc);
> - obj[1].relocation_count = num_wa_regs;
> -
> - out = base = gem_mmap__cpu(fd, obj[1].handle, 0, batch_sz, PROT_WRITE);
> - for (int i = 0; i < num_wa_regs; i++) {
> - *out++ = MI_STORE_REGISTER_MEM | ((gen >= 8 ? 4 : 2) - 2);
> - *out++ = wa_regs[i].addr;
> - reloc[i].target_handle = obj[0].handle;
> - reloc[i].offset = (out - base) * sizeof(*out);
> - reloc[i].delta = i * sizeof(uint32_t);
> - reloc[i].read_domains = I915_GEM_DOMAIN_INSTRUCTION;
> - reloc[i].write_domain = I915_GEM_DOMAIN_INSTRUCTION;
> - *out++ = reloc[i].delta;
> - if (gen >= 8)
> - *out++ = 0;
> - }
> - *out++ = MI_BATCH_BUFFER_END;
> - munmap(base, batch_sz);
> + igt_spin_t *spin;
> + int fw, fail = 0;
>
> - memset(&execbuf, 0, sizeof(execbuf));
> - execbuf.buffers_ptr = to_user_pointer(obj);
> - execbuf.buffer_count = 2;
> - execbuf.rsvd1 = ctx;
> - gem_execbuf(fd, &execbuf);
> + spin = igt_spin_new(i915, .ctx = ctx, .flags = IGT_SPIN_POLL_RUN);
> + igt_spin_busywait_until_started(spin);
>
> - gem_set_domain(fd, obj[0].handle, I915_GEM_DOMAIN_CPU, 0);
> -
> - igt_debug("Address\tval\t\tmask\t\tread\t\tresult\n");
> -
> - out = gem_mmap__cpu(fd, obj[0].handle, 0, result_sz, PROT_READ);
> + fw = igt_open_forcewake_handle(i915);
assert that it went fine?
Perhaps both will now do the trick. But if it fails
get the forcewake before spinner so you get more delay.
> for (int i = 0; i < num_wa_regs; i++) {
> + uint32_t value =
> + *(uint32_t *)(igt_global_mmio + wa_regs[i].addr);
const might have been warranted.
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
> const bool ok =
> (wa_regs[i].value & wa_regs[i].mask) ==
> - (out[i] & wa_regs[i].mask);
> + (value & wa_regs[i].mask);
> char buf[80];
>
> snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf),
> "0x%05X\t0x%08X\t0x%08X\t0x%08X",
> wa_regs[i].addr, wa_regs[i].value, wa_regs[i].mask,
> - out[i]);
> + value);
>
> if (ok) {
> igt_debug("%s\tOK\n", buf);
> @@ -151,27 +108,14 @@ static int workaround_fail_count(int fd, uint32_t ctx)
> igt_debug("%s\tIGNORED (w/o)\n", buf);
> } else {
> igt_warn("%s\tFAIL\n", buf);
> - fail_count++;
> + fail++;
> }
> }
> - munmap(out, result_sz);
> + close(fw);
>
> - gem_close(fd, obj[1].handle);
> - gem_close(fd, obj[0].handle);
> - free(reloc);
> + igt_spin_free(i915, spin);
>
> - return fail_count;
> -}
> -
> -static int reopen(int fd)
> -{
> - char path[256];
> -
> - snprintf(path, sizeof(path), "/proc/self/fd/%d", fd);
> - fd = open(path, O_RDWR);
> - igt_assert_lte(0, fd);
> -
> - return fd;
> + return fail;
> }
>
> #define CONTEXT 0x1
> @@ -181,7 +125,7 @@ static void check_workarounds(int fd, enum operation op, unsigned int flags)
> uint32_t ctx = 0;
>
> if (flags & FD)
> - fd = reopen(fd);
> + fd = gem_reopen_driver(fd);
>
> if (flags & CONTEXT) {
> gem_require_contexts(fd);
> @@ -252,6 +196,8 @@ igt_main
> device = drm_open_driver(DRIVER_INTEL);
> igt_require_gem(device);
>
> + intel_mmio_use_pci_bar(intel_get_pci_device());
> +
> gen = intel_gen(intel_get_drm_devid(device));
>
> fd = igt_debugfs_open(device, "i915_wa_registers", O_RDONLY);
> --
> 2.20.1
>
> _______________________________________________
> igt-dev mailing list
> igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] i915/gem_workarounds: Verify regs directly
Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 13:15:46 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ef4ho9bh.fsf@gaia.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190529095805.31851-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> writes:
> It seems like the HW validator is getting better at preventing our
> snooping of system registers from non-privileged batches! If we can't
> use SRM, let's probe the register directly through mmio, making sure we
> have the context spinning on the GPU first.
>
> v2: Hold forcewake just in case the spinning batch isn't enough to
> justify our register access.
>
If I recall correctly, either of them separately didn't
work. And there was delay after grabbing the fw before
the register contents appeared. Don't remember the gen tho.
> Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110544
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.william.auld@gmail.com>
> ---
> tests/i915/gem_workarounds.c | 88 +++++++-----------------------------
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_workarounds.c b/tests/i915/gem_workarounds.c
> index 44e3dce8a..2767b04d7 100644
> --- a/tests/i915/gem_workarounds.c
> +++ b/tests/i915/gem_workarounds.c
> @@ -80,70 +80,27 @@ static bool write_only(const uint32_t addr)
> return false;
> }
>
> -#define MI_STORE_REGISTER_MEM (0x24 << 23)
> -
> -static int workaround_fail_count(int fd, uint32_t ctx)
> +static int workaround_fail_count(int i915, uint32_t ctx)
> {
> - struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 obj[2];
> - struct drm_i915_gem_relocation_entry *reloc;
> - struct drm_i915_gem_execbuffer2 execbuf;
> - uint32_t result_sz, batch_sz;
> - uint32_t *base, *out;
> - int fail_count = 0;
> -
> - reloc = calloc(num_wa_regs, sizeof(*reloc));
> - igt_assert(reloc);
> -
> - result_sz = 4 * num_wa_regs;
> - result_sz = PAGE_ALIGN(result_sz);
> -
> - batch_sz = 16 * num_wa_regs + 4;
> - batch_sz = PAGE_ALIGN(batch_sz);
> -
> - memset(obj, 0, sizeof(obj));
> - obj[0].handle = gem_create(fd, result_sz);
> - gem_set_caching(fd, obj[0].handle, I915_CACHING_CACHED);
> - obj[1].handle = gem_create(fd, batch_sz);
> - obj[1].relocs_ptr = to_user_pointer(reloc);
> - obj[1].relocation_count = num_wa_regs;
> -
> - out = base = gem_mmap__cpu(fd, obj[1].handle, 0, batch_sz, PROT_WRITE);
> - for (int i = 0; i < num_wa_regs; i++) {
> - *out++ = MI_STORE_REGISTER_MEM | ((gen >= 8 ? 4 : 2) - 2);
> - *out++ = wa_regs[i].addr;
> - reloc[i].target_handle = obj[0].handle;
> - reloc[i].offset = (out - base) * sizeof(*out);
> - reloc[i].delta = i * sizeof(uint32_t);
> - reloc[i].read_domains = I915_GEM_DOMAIN_INSTRUCTION;
> - reloc[i].write_domain = I915_GEM_DOMAIN_INSTRUCTION;
> - *out++ = reloc[i].delta;
> - if (gen >= 8)
> - *out++ = 0;
> - }
> - *out++ = MI_BATCH_BUFFER_END;
> - munmap(base, batch_sz);
> + igt_spin_t *spin;
> + int fw, fail = 0;
>
> - memset(&execbuf, 0, sizeof(execbuf));
> - execbuf.buffers_ptr = to_user_pointer(obj);
> - execbuf.buffer_count = 2;
> - execbuf.rsvd1 = ctx;
> - gem_execbuf(fd, &execbuf);
> + spin = igt_spin_new(i915, .ctx = ctx, .flags = IGT_SPIN_POLL_RUN);
> + igt_spin_busywait_until_started(spin);
>
> - gem_set_domain(fd, obj[0].handle, I915_GEM_DOMAIN_CPU, 0);
> -
> - igt_debug("Address\tval\t\tmask\t\tread\t\tresult\n");
> -
> - out = gem_mmap__cpu(fd, obj[0].handle, 0, result_sz, PROT_READ);
> + fw = igt_open_forcewake_handle(i915);
assert that it went fine?
Perhaps both will now do the trick. But if it fails
get the forcewake before spinner so you get more delay.
> for (int i = 0; i < num_wa_regs; i++) {
> + uint32_t value =
> + *(uint32_t *)(igt_global_mmio + wa_regs[i].addr);
const might have been warranted.
Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
> const bool ok =
> (wa_regs[i].value & wa_regs[i].mask) ==
> - (out[i] & wa_regs[i].mask);
> + (value & wa_regs[i].mask);
> char buf[80];
>
> snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf),
> "0x%05X\t0x%08X\t0x%08X\t0x%08X",
> wa_regs[i].addr, wa_regs[i].value, wa_regs[i].mask,
> - out[i]);
> + value);
>
> if (ok) {
> igt_debug("%s\tOK\n", buf);
> @@ -151,27 +108,14 @@ static int workaround_fail_count(int fd, uint32_t ctx)
> igt_debug("%s\tIGNORED (w/o)\n", buf);
> } else {
> igt_warn("%s\tFAIL\n", buf);
> - fail_count++;
> + fail++;
> }
> }
> - munmap(out, result_sz);
> + close(fw);
>
> - gem_close(fd, obj[1].handle);
> - gem_close(fd, obj[0].handle);
> - free(reloc);
> + igt_spin_free(i915, spin);
>
> - return fail_count;
> -}
> -
> -static int reopen(int fd)
> -{
> - char path[256];
> -
> - snprintf(path, sizeof(path), "/proc/self/fd/%d", fd);
> - fd = open(path, O_RDWR);
> - igt_assert_lte(0, fd);
> -
> - return fd;
> + return fail;
> }
>
> #define CONTEXT 0x1
> @@ -181,7 +125,7 @@ static void check_workarounds(int fd, enum operation op, unsigned int flags)
> uint32_t ctx = 0;
>
> if (flags & FD)
> - fd = reopen(fd);
> + fd = gem_reopen_driver(fd);
>
> if (flags & CONTEXT) {
> gem_require_contexts(fd);
> @@ -252,6 +196,8 @@ igt_main
> device = drm_open_driver(DRIVER_INTEL);
> igt_require_gem(device);
>
> + intel_mmio_use_pci_bar(intel_get_pci_device());
> +
> gen = intel_gen(intel_get_drm_devid(device));
>
> fd = igt_debugfs_open(device, "i915_wa_registers", O_RDONLY);
> --
> 2.20.1
>
> _______________________________________________
> igt-dev mailing list
> igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-29 10:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-29 9:58 [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] i915/gem_workarounds: Verify regs directly Chris Wilson
2019-05-29 9:58 ` Chris Wilson
2019-05-29 10:00 ` [Intel-gfx] " Chris Wilson
2019-05-29 10:00 ` Chris Wilson
2019-05-29 10:15 ` Mika Kuoppala [this message]
2019-05-29 10:15 ` [igt-dev] " Mika Kuoppala
2019-05-29 10:24 ` Chris Wilson
2019-05-29 10:24 ` Chris Wilson
2019-05-29 10:27 ` [igt-dev] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for i915/gem_workarounds: Verify regs directly (rev2) Patchwork
2019-05-29 14:56 ` [igt-dev] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-05-25 7:05 [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] i915/gem_workarounds: Verify regs directly Chris Wilson
2019-05-29 9:51 ` Matthew Auld
2019-05-29 9:51 ` Matthew Auld
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=87ef4ho9bh.fsf@gaia.fi.intel.com \
--to=mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
/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.