From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga18.intel.com (mga18.intel.com [134.134.136.126]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B7D56EA57 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 16:09:43 +0000 (UTC) References: <20200327044250.64274-1-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> <87wo76s8or.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> From: Lionel Landwerlin Message-ID: <91876d66-5ba8-0351-583e-8baf1ff4a1e1@intel.com> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 18:09:41 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87wo76s8or.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/perf: add a test for OA data polling reads using "small" buffers 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: igt-dev-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "igt-dev" To: "Dixit, Ashutosh" , igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org List-ID: On 27/03/2020 06:50, Dixit, Ashutosh wrote: > On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 21:42:50 -0700, Ashutosh Dixit wrote: >> diff --git a/tests/perf.c b/tests/perf.c >> index 724f6f809..3dc757c3b 100644 >> --- a/tests/perf.c >> +++ b/tests/perf.c >> +static void test_polling_small_buf(void) >> +{ > /snip/ > >> + >> + igt_assert(abs(n_expect_read_bytes - n_bytes_read) < (0.10 * n_expect_read_bytes)); >> +} >> + > I'd be wary of a 90% match on slow platforms like Atom? Maybe 80% is safer? Do we have any experiment showing them behaving differently? -Lionel _______________________________________________ igt-dev mailing list igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev