Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t 3/5] lib/intel_batchbuffer: Make blitter asserts more useful

Chris Wilson
2019-04-17T20:46:09Z

Quoting Ville Syrjala (2019-04-17 21:35:42)
> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
>
> Use igt_assert_lt/lte for the blitter coord/stride asserts
> so that we can see what the offending value was. gcc likes
> to optimize the values away so gdb often doesn't help as
> much as one would like.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> lib/intel_batchbuffer.c | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/intel_batchbuffer.c b/lib/intel_batchbuffer.c
> index 712ce1a32da6..422f3b6186aa 100644
> --- a/lib/intel_batchbuffer.c
> +++ b/lib/intel_batchbuffer.c
> @@ -417,16 +417,16 @@ intel_blt_copy(struct intel_batchbuffer *batch,
> cmd_bits |= XY_SRC_COPY_BLT_DST_TILED;
> }
>
> -#define CHECK_RANGE(x) ((x) >= 0 && (x) < (1 << 15))
> - igt_assert(CHECK_RANGE(src_x1) && CHECK_RANGE(src_y1) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(dst_x1) && CHECK_RANGE(dst_y1) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(width) && CHECK_RANGE(height) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(src_x1 + width) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(src_y1 + height) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(dst_x1 + width) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(dst_y1 + height) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(src_pitch) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(dst_pitch));
> +#define CHECK_RANGE(x) do { \
> + igt_assert_lte(0, (x)); \
> + igt_assert_lt((x), (1 << 15)); \
> +} while (0)
> + CHECK_RANGE(src_x1); CHECK_RANGE(src_y1);
> + CHECK_RANGE(dst_x1); CHECK_RANGE(dst_y1);
> + CHECK_RANGE(width); CHECK_RANGE(height);
> + CHECK_RANGE(src_x1 + width); CHECK_RANGE(src_y1 + height);
> + CHECK_RANGE(dst_x1 + width); CHECK_RANGE(dst_y1 + height);
> + CHECK_RANGE(src_pitch); CHECK_RANGE(dst_pitch);
> #undef CHECK_RANGE

Ok.

> br13_bits = 0;
> @@ -715,13 +715,16 @@ void igt_blitter_fast_copy__raw(int fd,
> dword0 = fast_copy_dword0(src_tiling, dst_tiling);
> dword1 = fast_copy_dword1(src_tiling, dst_tiling, bpp);
>
> -#define CHECK_RANGE(x) ((x) >= 0 && (x) < (1 << 15))
> - assert(CHECK_RANGE(src_x) && CHECK_RANGE(src_y) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(dst_x) && CHECK_RANGE(dst_y) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(width) && CHECK_RANGE(height) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(src_x + width) && CHECK_RANGE(src_y + height) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(dst_x + width) && CHECK_RANGE(dst_y + height) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(src_pitch) && CHECK_RANGE(dst_pitch));

Plain assert!

> +#define CHECK_RANGE(x) do { \
> + igt_assert_lte(0, (x)); \
> + igt_assert_lt((x), (1 << 15)); \
> +} while (0)

This looks like a redefinition? Oh, undef.

Maybe call it CHECK_BLT_RANGE()? CHECK_XY_RANGE()?

> + CHECK_RANGE(src_x); CHECK_RANGE(src_y);
> + CHECK_RANGE(dst_x); CHECK_RANGE(dst_y);
> + CHECK_RANGE(width); CHECK_RANGE(height);
> + CHECK_RANGE(src_x + width); CHECK_RANGE(src_y + height);
> + CHECK_RANGE(dst_x + width); CHECK_RANGE(dst_y + height);
> + CHECK_RANGE(src_pitch); CHECK_RANGE(dst_pitch);
> #undef CHECK_RANGE

Ok.

> batch[i++] = dword0;
> @@ -791,13 +794,16 @@ void igt_blitter_fast_copy(struct intel_batchbuffer *batch,
> dword0 = fast_copy_dword0(src->tiling, dst->tiling);
> dword1 = fast_copy_dword1(src->tiling, dst->tiling, dst->bpp);
>
> -#define CHECK_RANGE(x) ((x) >= 0 && (x) < (1 << 15))
> - assert(CHECK_RANGE(src_x) && CHECK_RANGE(src_y) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(dst_x) && CHECK_RANGE(dst_y) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(width) && CHECK_RANGE(height) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(src_x + width) && CHECK_RANGE(src_y + height) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(dst_x + width) && CHECK_RANGE(dst_y + height) &&
> - CHECK_RANGE(src_pitch) && CHECK_RANGE(dst_pitch));
> +#define CHECK_RANGE(x) do { \
> + igt_assert_lte(0, (x)); \
> + igt_assert_lt((x), (1 << 15)); \
> +} while (0)

Third time's a winner!

> + CHECK_RANGE(src_x); CHECK_RANGE(src_y);
> + CHECK_RANGE(dst_x); CHECK_RANGE(dst_y);
> + CHECK_RANGE(width); CHECK_RANGE(height);
> + CHECK_RANGE(src_x + width); CHECK_RANGE(src_y + height);
> + CHECK_RANGE(dst_x + width); CHECK_RANGE(dst_y + height);
> + CHECK_RANGE(src_pitch); CHECK_RANGE(dst_pitch);
> #undef CHECK_RANGE

Ok.

Kill the repeated CHECK_RANGE() definitions.

Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
-Chris