From: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
To: "Dominik Karol Piątkowski" <dominik.karol.piatkowski@intel.com>,
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: "Dominik Grzegorzek" <dominik.grzegorzek@intel.com>,
"Christoph Manszewski" <christoph.manszewski@intel.com>,
"Jan Sokolowski" <jan.sokolowski@intel.com>,
"Dominik Karol Piątkowski" <dominik.karol.piatkowski@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 i-g-t 3/3] tests/xe_eudebug_online: Add set-breakpoint-sigint-debugger test
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 15:23:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87jz8ul6wp.fsf@mkuoppal-desk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87msdql7ig.fsf@mkuoppal-desk>
Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com> writes:
> Dominik Karol Piątkowski <dominik.karol.piatkowski@intel.com> writes:
>
>> Add a test that sends SIGINT to the debugger thread with random timing
>> and checks if nothing breaks, exercising the scenario multiple times.
>>
>> v2: Count correctly timed SIGINTs and assert that they happened (Mika)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dominik Karol Piątkowski <dominik.karol.piatkowski@intel.com>
>> ---
>> tests/intel/xe_eudebug_online.c | 96 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 96 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/intel/xe_eudebug_online.c b/tests/intel/xe_eudebug_online.c
>> index 472013fe1..0ec1f2156 100644
>> --- a/tests/intel/xe_eudebug_online.c
>> +++ b/tests/intel/xe_eudebug_online.c
>> @@ -1506,6 +1506,98 @@ static void test_set_breakpoint_online(int fd, struct drm_xe_engine_class_instan
>> online_debug_data_destroy(data);
>> }
>>
>> +/**
>> + * SUBTEST: set-breakpoint-sigint-debugger
>> + * Description:
>> + * A variant of set-breakpoint that sends SIGINT to the debugger thread with random timing
>> + * and checks if nothing breaks, exercising the scenario multiple times.
>> + */
>> +static void test_set_breakpoint_online_sigint_debugger(int fd,
>> + struct drm_xe_engine_class_instance *hwe,
>> + int flags)
>> +{
>> + struct xe_eudebug_session *s;
>> + struct online_debug_data *data;
>> + struct timespec ts = { };
>> + int loop_count = 0;
>> + uint64_t sleep_time;
>> + uint64_t set_breakpoint_time;
>> + uint64_t max_sleep_time;
>> + uint64_t events_max = 0;
>> + int sigints_during_test = 0;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Measure the average time required for basic set-breakpoint variant,
>> + * so sleep_time range is correct.
>> + */
>> + igt_nsec_elapsed(&ts);
>> + for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
>> + test_set_breakpoint_online(fd, hwe, SHADER_NOP | TRIGGER_UFENCE_SET_BREAKPOINT);
>> + set_breakpoint_time = igt_nsec_elapsed(&ts) / (NSEC_PER_MSEC / USEC_PER_MSEC) / 10;
>> + igt_info("Average set-breakpoint execution time: %" PRIu64 " us\n", set_breakpoint_time);
>> + max_sleep_time = set_breakpoint_time * 11 / 10;
>> + igt_info("Maximum sleep_time: %" PRIu64 " us\n", max_sleep_time);
>> +
>> + ts = (struct timespec) { };
>> + igt_nsec_elapsed(&ts);
>> +
>> + while (igt_seconds_elapsed(&ts) < 60) {
>> + uint64_t event_count;
>> +
>> + sleep_time = rand() % max_sleep_time;
>> + igt_debug("Loop %d: SIGINT after %" PRIu64 " us\n", ++loop_count, sleep_time);
>
> This worries me. The loop count increment is inside of this macro and
> even if it would work now, please change it to:
>
> if (loop_count++ == 1) in below.
Argh, if (!loop_count++)
>
> With that,
> Reviewed-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
>
>> +
>> + data = online_debug_data_create(hwe);
>> + s = xe_eudebug_session_create(fd, run_online_client, flags, data);
>> + xe_eudebug_debugger_add_trigger(s->debugger, DRM_XE_EUDEBUG_EVENT_OPEN,
>> + open_trigger);
>> + xe_eudebug_debugger_add_trigger(s->debugger, DRM_XE_EUDEBUG_EVENT_EXEC_QUEUE,
>> + exec_queue_trigger);
>> + xe_eudebug_debugger_add_trigger(s->debugger, DRM_XE_EUDEBUG_EVENT_VM,
>> + vm_open_trigger);
>> + xe_eudebug_debugger_add_trigger(s->debugger, DRM_XE_EUDEBUG_EVENT_METADATA,
>> + create_metadata_trigger);
>> + xe_eudebug_debugger_add_trigger(s->debugger, DRM_XE_EUDEBUG_EVENT_VM_BIND_UFENCE,
>> + ufence_ack_set_bp_trigger);
>> + xe_eudebug_debugger_add_trigger(s->debugger, DRM_XE_EUDEBUG_EVENT_EU_ATTENTION,
>> + eu_attention_resume_trigger);
>> +
>> + igt_assert_eq(xe_eudebug_debugger_attach(s->debugger, s->client), 0);
>> + xe_eudebug_debugger_start_worker(s->debugger);
>> + igt_assert_eq(READ_ONCE(s->debugger->event_count), 0);
>> + xe_eudebug_client_start(s->client);
>> +
>> + /* Sample max events without SIGINT */
>> + if (loop_count == 1)
>> + xe_eudebug_client_wait_done(s->client);
>> + else
>> + usleep(sleep_time);
>> +
>> + event_count = READ_ONCE(s->debugger->event_count);
>> + if (event_count > events_max)
>> + events_max = event_count;
>> + else if (event_count > 0 && event_count < events_max)
>> + sigints_during_test++;
>> +
>> + igt_assert_eq(pthread_kill(s->debugger->worker_thread, SIGINT), 0);
>> + close(s->debugger->fd);
>> +
>> + igt_assert_eq(READ_ONCE(s->debugger->worker_state), DEBUGGER_WORKER_ACTIVE);
>> + WRITE_ONCE(s->debugger->worker_state, DEBUGGER_WORKER_INACTIVE);
>> +
>> + xe_eudebug_client_wait_done(s->client);
>> +
>> + xe_eudebug_event_log_print(s->debugger->log, true);
>> + xe_eudebug_event_log_print(s->client->log, true);
>> +
>> + xe_eudebug_session_destroy(s);
>> + online_debug_data_destroy(data);
>> + }
>> +
>> + igt_info("%d correctly timed SIGINTs in %d loops\n", sigints_during_test, loop_count);
>> + igt_assert_lt(0, sigints_during_test);
>> +}
>> +
>> /**
>> * SUBTEST: pagefault-read
>> * Description:
>> @@ -2426,6 +2518,10 @@ igt_main
>> test_gt_render_or_compute("set-breakpoint", fd, hwe)
>> test_set_breakpoint_online(fd, hwe, SHADER_NOP | TRIGGER_UFENCE_SET_BREAKPOINT);
>>
>> + test_gt_render_or_compute("set-breakpoint-sigint-debugger", fd, hwe)
>> + test_set_breakpoint_online_sigint_debugger(fd, hwe,
>> + SHADER_NOP | TRIGGER_UFENCE_SET_BREAKPOINT);
>> +
>> test_gt_render_or_compute("breakpoint-not-in-debug-mode", fd, hwe)
>> test_basic_online(fd, hwe, SHADER_BREAKPOINT | DISABLE_DEBUG_MODE);
>>
>> --
>> 2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-12 13:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-11 13:55 [PATCH v2 i-g-t 0/3] tests/xe_eudebug_online: Add set-breakpoint-sigint-debugger test Dominik Karol Piątkowski
2025-03-11 13:55 ` [PATCH v2 i-g-t 1/3] lib/eudebug: Make debugger thread SIGINTable Dominik Karol Piątkowski
2025-03-11 13:55 ` [PATCH v2 i-g-t 2/3] lib/eudebug: Fix xe_eudebug_client_stop corner case Dominik Karol Piątkowski
2025-03-11 13:55 ` [PATCH v2 i-g-t 3/3] tests/xe_eudebug_online: Add set-breakpoint-sigint-debugger test Dominik Karol Piątkowski
2025-03-12 13:10 ` Mika Kuoppala
2025-03-12 13:23 ` Mika Kuoppala [this message]
2025-03-12 2:07 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: success for tests/xe_eudebug_online: Add set-breakpoint-sigint-debugger test (rev2) Patchwork
2025-03-12 2:26 ` ✓ i915.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2025-03-12 14:03 ` ✓ i915.CI.Full: " Patchwork
2025-03-12 17:41 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
2025-03-13 7:06 ` Piatkowski, Dominik Karol
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=87jz8ul6wp.fsf@mkuoppal-desk \
--to=mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com \
--cc=christoph.manszewski@intel.com \
--cc=dominik.grzegorzek@intel.com \
--cc=dominik.karol.piatkowski@intel.com \
--cc=igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jan.sokolowski@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox