Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/i915: Use engine query interface for gem_ctx_isolation/persistence

Petri Latvala
2019-12-04T14:53:27Z

On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 09:36:11AM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On 03/12/2019 05:11, Stuart Summers wrote:
> > Align with gem_exec_basic and other tests using the newer
> > engine query interface into i915 to enumerate active engines.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stuart Summers <stuart.summers@intel.com>
> > ---
> > tests/i915/gem_ctx_isolation.c | 4 ++--
> > tests/i915/gem_ctx_persistence.c | 2 +-
> > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_ctx_isolation.c b/tests/i915/gem_ctx_isolation.c
> > index 6aa27133..9435209e 100644
> > --- a/tests/i915/gem_ctx_isolation.c
> > +++ b/tests/i915/gem_ctx_isolation.c
> > @@ -856,6 +856,7 @@ static unsigned int __has_context_isolation(int fd)
> > igt_main
> > {
> > + struct intel_execution_engine2 *e;
> > unsigned int has_context_isolation = 0;
> > int fd = -1;
> > @@ -876,8 +877,7 @@ igt_main
> > igt_skip_on(gen > LAST_KNOWN_GEN);
> > }
> > - for (const struct intel_execution_engine2 *e = intel_execution_engines2;
> > - e->name; e++) {
> > + __for_each_physical_engine(fd, e) {
> > igt_subtest_group {
> > igt_fixture {
> > igt_require(has_context_isolation & (1 << e->class));
> > diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_ctx_persistence.c b/tests/i915/gem_ctx_persistence.c
> > index d68431ae..30772159 100644
> > --- a/tests/i915/gem_ctx_persistence.c
> > +++ b/tests/i915/gem_ctx_persistence.c
> > @@ -727,7 +727,7 @@ igt_main
> > igt_subtest("hangcheck")
> > test_nohangcheck_hostile(i915);
> > - __for_each_static_engine(e) {
> > + __for_each_physical_engine(i915, e) {
> > igt_subtest_group {
> > igt_fixture {
> > gem_require_ring(i915, e->flags);
> >
>
> __for_each_static_engine is correct, at least if you don't want CI folks go
> look for their pitchforks. :) Same for the first hunk, everything that
> enumerates subtests needs to be static.
>
> Option 2, the preferred one - convert the tests to igt_subtest_with_dynamic
> and then you can use __for_each_physical_engine.

Doesn't __for_each_physical_engine anyway have a hack for being called in that context?

Btw, option 2 is https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/igt-gpu-tools/issues/44

Currently blocking that effort is getting
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/70286/ into shape.

--
Petri Latvala