From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: References: <20200224215650.39624-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> From: Tvrtko Ursulin Message-ID: <6ad2e8c7-f3e3-a43e-ea4c-92ab57d69b06@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 18:08:14 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200224215650.39624-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] i915/gem_ctx_persistence: Check precision of hostile cancellation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" To: Chris Wilson , intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org List-ID: On 24/02/2020 21:56, Chris Wilson wrote: > Check that if we have to remove a hostile request from a non-persistent > context, we do so without harming any other concurrent users. > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson > --- > tests/i915/gem_ctx_persistence.c | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 63 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_ctx_persistence.c b/tests/i915/gem_ctx_persistence.c > index 20007f5c4..cd174d263 100644 > --- a/tests/i915/gem_ctx_persistence.c > +++ b/tests/i915/gem_ctx_persistence.c > @@ -613,6 +613,62 @@ static void test_process_mixed(int pfd, unsigned int engine) > gem_quiescent_gpu(pfd); > } > > +static void > +test_saturated_hostile(int i915, const struct intel_execution_engine2 *engine) > +{ > + const struct intel_execution_engine2 *other; > + igt_spin_t *spin; > + uint32_t ctx; > + int fence = -1; > + > + /* > + * Check that if we have to remove a hostile request from a > + * non-persistent context, we do so without harming any other > + * concurrent users. > + */ > + > + __for_each_physical_engine(i915, other) { > + if (other->flags == engine->flags) > + continue; > + > + spin = igt_spin_new(i915, > + .engine = other->flags, > + .flags = (IGT_SPIN_NO_PREEMPTION | > + IGT_SPIN_FENCE_OUT)); > + > + if (fence < 0) { > + fence = spin->out_fence; > + } else { > + int tmp; > + > + tmp = sync_fence_merge(fence, spin->out_fence); > + close(fence); > + close(spin->out_fence); > + > + fence = tmp; > + } > + spin->out_fence = -1; > + } > + > + ctx = gem_context_clone_with_engines(i915, 0); > + gem_context_set_persistence(i915, ctx, false); > + spin = igt_spin_new(i915, ctx, > + .engine = engine->flags, > + .flags = (IGT_SPIN_NO_PREEMPTION | > + IGT_SPIN_POLL_RUN | > + IGT_SPIN_FENCE_OUT)); > + igt_spin_busywait_until_started(spin); > + gem_context_destroy(i915, ctx); > + > + igt_assert_eq(sync_fence_wait(spin->out_fence, reset_timeout_ms), 0); > + igt_assert_eq(sync_fence_status(spin->out_fence), -EIO); > + > + /* All other spinners should be left unharmed */ > + gem_quiescent_gpu(i915); > + igt_assert_eq(sync_fence_wait(fence, reset_timeout_ms), 0); > + igt_assert_eq(sync_fence_status(fence), 1); I don't quite get this test. Why would other spinners be unharmed? They are non-preemptible as well. And non-persistent spinner is alone on the engine. So what aspect you wanted to test? Regards, Tvrtko > +} > + > static void test_processes(int i915) > { > struct { > @@ -1041,6 +1097,13 @@ igt_main > } > } > > + igt_subtest_with_dynamic_f("saturated-hostile") { > + __for_each_physical_engine(i915, e) { > + igt_dynamic_f("%s", e->name) > + test_saturated_hostile(i915, e); > + } > + } > + > igt_subtest("smoketest") > smoketest(i915); > } > _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx