From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
To: Petri Latvala <petri.latvala@intel.com>, igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [RFC PATCH i-g-t] lib/i915: Generate engine names at runtime
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 16:01:45 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bfde297f-9128-19c6-ba46-312d2064b299@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191115121445.11693-1-petri.latvala@intel.com>
On 15/11/2019 12:14, Petri Latvala wrote:
> The kernel supplies us an engine list with engine class and an
> instance id. If the hardcoded engine list doesn't have the
> class+instance we get, construct the engine name with printf instead
> of calling additional engines "unknown".
>
> Signed-off-by: Petri Latvala <petri.latvala@intel.com>
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> Cc: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@intel.com>
> Cc: Katarzyna Dec <katarzyna.dec@intel.com>
>
> ---
> lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++--------
> lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.h | 2 +-
> lib/igt_gt.c | 8 ++++++++
> lib/igt_gt.h | 7 ++++++-
> 4 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.c b/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.c
> index 790d455f..0707f237 100644
> --- a/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.c
> +++ b/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.c
> @@ -103,6 +103,7 @@ static void init_engine(struct intel_execution_engine2 *e2,
> const struct intel_execution_engine2 *__e2;
> static const char *unknown_name = "unknown",
> *virtual_name = "virtual";
> + const struct intel_execution_engine_class *cls;
>
> e2->class = class;
> e2->instance = instance;
> @@ -111,7 +112,7 @@ static void init_engine(struct intel_execution_engine2 *e2,
> /* engine is a virtual engine */
> if (class == I915_ENGINE_CLASS_INVALID &&
> instance == I915_ENGINE_CLASS_INVALID_VIRTUAL) {
> - e2->name = virtual_name;
> + strncpy(e2->name, virtual_name, sizeof(e2->name));
> e2->is_virtual = true;
> return;
> }
> @@ -120,12 +121,22 @@ static void init_engine(struct intel_execution_engine2 *e2,
> if (__e2->class == class && __e2->instance == instance)
> break;
>
> - if (__e2->name) {
> - e2->name = __e2->name;
> + if (__e2->name[0]) {
> + strncpy(e2->name, __e2->name, sizeof(e2->name));
> } else {
> - igt_warn("found unknown engine (%d, %d)\n", class, instance);
> - e2->name = unknown_name;
> - e2->flags = -1;
> + for (cls = intel_execution_engine_class_map; cls->name; cls++) {
> + if (cls->class == class) {
> + snprintf(e2->name, sizeof(e2->name), "%s%d", cls->name, instance);
> + igt_info("unknown but supported engine %s found\n", e2->name);
Hm not really unknown, just a new instance relative to the static table.
I'd probably downgrade this to debug level?
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (!e2->name[0]) {
> + igt_info("found unknown engine (%d, %d)\n", class, instance);
> + strncpy(e2->name, unknown_name, sizeof(e2->name));
unknown<class>:<instance> ?
And say unknown _class_ in the log message?
> + e2->flags = -1;
> + }
> }
>
> /* just to remark it */
> @@ -223,7 +234,7 @@ struct intel_engine_data intel_init_engine_list(int fd, uint32_t ctx_id)
> struct intel_execution_engine2 *__e2 =
> &engine_data.engines[engine_data.nengines];
>
> - __e2->name = e2->name;
> + strncpy(__e2->name, e2->name, sizeof(__e2->name));
> __e2->instance = e2->instance;
> __e2->class = e2->class;
> __e2->flags = e2->flags;
> @@ -302,7 +313,7 @@ struct intel_execution_engine2 gem_eb_flags_to_engine(unsigned int flags)
>
> if (ring == I915_EXEC_DEFAULT) {
> e2__.flags = I915_EXEC_DEFAULT;
> - e2__.name = "default";
> + strncpy(e2__.name, "default", sizeof(e2__.name));
> } else {
> const struct intel_execution_engine2 *e2;
>
> diff --git a/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.h b/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.h
> index d98773e0..525741cc 100644
> --- a/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.h
> +++ b/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.h
> @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ bool gem_engine_is_equal(const struct intel_execution_engine2 *e1,
> struct intel_execution_engine2 gem_eb_flags_to_engine(unsigned int flags);
>
> #define __for_each_static_engine(e__) \
> - for ((e__) = intel_execution_engines2; (e__)->name; (e__)++)
> + for ((e__) = intel_execution_engines2; (e__)->name[0]; (e__)++)
>
> #define for_each_context_engine(fd__, ctx__, e__) \
> for (struct intel_engine_data i__ = intel_init_engine_list(fd__, ctx__); \
> diff --git a/lib/igt_gt.c b/lib/igt_gt.c
> index 256c7cbc..25e6c455 100644
> --- a/lib/igt_gt.c
> +++ b/lib/igt_gt.c
> @@ -596,6 +596,14 @@ const struct intel_execution_engine2 intel_execution_engines2[] = {
> { }
> };
>
> +const struct intel_execution_engine_class intel_execution_engine_class_map[] = {
> + { "rcs", I915_ENGINE_CLASS_RENDER },
> + { "bcs", I915_ENGINE_CLASS_COPY },
> + { "vcs", I915_ENGINE_CLASS_VIDEO },
> + { "vecs", I915_ENGINE_CLASS_VIDEO_ENHANCE },
> + { }
> +};
> +
> int gem_execbuf_flags_to_engine_class(unsigned int flags)
> {
> switch (flags & 0x3f) {
> diff --git a/lib/igt_gt.h b/lib/igt_gt.h
> index 66088d39..0268031f 100644
> --- a/lib/igt_gt.h
> +++ b/lib/igt_gt.h
> @@ -95,13 +95,18 @@ bool gem_can_store_dword(int fd, unsigned int engine);
> bool gem_class_can_store_dword(int fd, int class);
>
> extern const struct intel_execution_engine2 {
> - const char *name;
> + char name[10];
> int class;
> int instance;
> uint64_t flags;
> bool is_virtual;
> } intel_execution_engines2[];
>
> +extern const struct intel_execution_engine_class {
> + const char *name;
> + int class;
> +} intel_execution_engine_class_map[];
> +
> int gem_execbuf_flags_to_engine_class(unsigned int flags);
>
> #endif /* IGT_GT_H */
>
Implementation looks okay to me, but what does it gains us? Potentially
introduces a slight confusion between subtests as enumerated by engine
and engines iterated inside some tests.
Only an interim step before elimination of the static array? But danger
is in the above mismatch.
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-15 16:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-15 12:14 [igt-dev] [RFC PATCH i-g-t] lib/i915: Generate engine names at runtime Petri Latvala
2019-11-15 12:30 ` [igt-dev] ✗ GitLab.Pipeline: warning for " Patchwork
2019-11-15 12:52 ` [igt-dev] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2019-11-15 14:15 ` [igt-dev] [RFC PATCH i-g-t] " Andi Shyti
2019-11-15 16:01 ` Tvrtko Ursulin [this message]
2019-11-18 10:05 ` Petri Latvala
2019-11-18 11:33 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2019-11-16 18:29 ` [igt-dev] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure for " Patchwork
2020-01-22 13:44 ` [igt-dev] [RFC PATCH i-g-t] " Tvrtko Ursulin
2020-01-22 13:52 ` Petri Latvala
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=bfde297f-9128-19c6-ba46-312d2064b299@linux.intel.com \
--to=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=petri.latvala@intel.com \
--cc=tvrtko.ursulin@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