From: Lionel Landwerlin <lionel.g.landwerlin@intel.com>
To: Umesh Nerlige Ramappa <umesh.nerlige.ramappa@intel.com>
Cc: igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v2 3/3] tests/i915/perf: verify reason field in OA reports is never 0
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 13:40:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c40c0295-a533-a68d-8cb9-094408ab8d9e@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201125223537.GA73672@orsosgc001.ra.intel.com>
On 26/11/2020 00:35, Umesh Nerlige Ramappa wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 01:25:40PM +0200, Lionel Landwerlin wrote:
>> We're about to remove the filtering in i915 on 0 reason fields because
>> we assume this was a possibility, but it turned out to be a corruption
>> in the tail pointer register that made us read cleared data.
>>
>> This test is here to verify that our assumption hold that the HW never
>> produces such reports.
>>
>> v2: Fix len checking (Umesh)
>> Count report lost events (Umesh)
>> Check report sanity (Umesh)
>> Limit test to 3 times the OA buffer (Umesh)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lionel Landwerlin <lionel.g.landwerlin@intel.com>
>> ---
>> tests/i915/perf.c | 90 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 90 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/i915/perf.c b/tests/i915/perf.c
>> index 811067aad..2d442df96 100644
>> --- a/tests/i915/perf.c
>> +++ b/tests/i915/perf.c
>> @@ -2550,6 +2550,89 @@ test_buffer_fill(void)
>> __perf_close(stream_fd);
>> }
>>
>> +static void
>> +test_non_zero_reason(void)
>> +{
>> + /* ~10 micro second period */
>> + int oa_exponent = max_oa_exponent_for_period_lte(10000);
>> + uint64_t properties[] = {
>> + /* Include OA reports in samples */
>> + DRM_I915_PERF_PROP_SAMPLE_OA, true,
>> +
>> + /* OA unit configuration */
>> + DRM_I915_PERF_PROP_OA_METRICS_SET,
>> test_set->perf_oa_metrics_set,
>> + DRM_I915_PERF_PROP_OA_FORMAT, test_set->perf_oa_format,
>> + DRM_I915_PERF_PROP_OA_EXPONENT, oa_exponent,
>> + };
>> + struct drm_i915_perf_open_param param = {
>> + .flags = I915_PERF_FLAG_FD_CLOEXEC,
>> + .num_properties = sizeof(properties) / 16,
>> + .properties_ptr = to_user_pointer(properties),
>> + };
>> + struct drm_i915_perf_record_header *header;
>> + uint32_t buf_size = 3 * 65536 * (256 + sizeof(struct
>> drm_i915_perf_record_header));
>> + uint8_t *buf = malloc(buf_size);
>> + uint32_t total_len = 0, reports_lost;
>> + const uint32_t *last_report;
>> + int len;
>> +
>> + igt_assert(buf);
>
> nit: Looks like sanity check will log the report0/report1 pointers. We
> could log the buf pointer here so we get a sense of the report index
> that failed.
Thanks, I did not meant to leave the pointer to the report in the
previous change, I was just checking those same timestamp reports ;)
I just pushed the 2 previous commits, waiting for the Gen11 fix to go
before I land this patch.
>
> Either ways, this is
>
> Reviewed-by: Umesh Nerlige Ramappa <umesh.nerlige.ramappa@intel.com>
>
> Thanks for adding this test,
> Umesh
>> +
>> + igt_debug("Ready to read about %u bytes\n", buf_size);
>> +
>> + load_helper_init();
>> + load_helper_run(HIGH);
>> +
>> + stream_fd = __perf_open(drm_fd, ¶m, true /* prevent_pm */);
>> +
>> + while (total_len < (buf_size - sizeof(struct
>> drm_i915_perf_record_header)) &&
>> + ((len = read(stream_fd, &buf[total_len], buf_size -
>> total_len)) > 0 ||
>> + (len == -1 && errno == EINTR))) {
>> + if (len > 0)
>> + total_len += len;
>> + }
>> +
>> + __perf_close(stream_fd);
>> +
>> + load_helper_stop();
>> + load_helper_fini();
>> +
>> + igt_debug("Got %u bytes\n", total_len);
>> +
>> + last_report = NULL;
>> + reports_lost = 0;
>> + for (uint32_t offset = 0; offset < total_len; offset +=
>> header->size) {
>> + header = (void *) (buf + offset);
>> +
>> + switch (header->type) {
>> + case DRM_I915_PERF_RECORD_OA_REPORT_LOST:
>> + reports_lost++;
>> + break;
>> + case DRM_I915_PERF_RECORD_SAMPLE: {
>> + const uint32_t *report = (void *) (header + 1);
>> + uint32_t reason = (report[0] >> OAREPORT_REASON_SHIFT) &
>> + OAREPORT_REASON_MASK;
>> +
>> + igt_assert_neq(reason, 0);
>> +
>> + if (last_report) {
>> + sanity_check_reports(last_report, report,
>> + test_set->perf_oa_format);
>> + }
>> + last_report = report;
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + case DRM_I915_PERF_RECORD_OA_BUFFER_LOST:
>> + igt_assert(!"unexpected overflow");
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> + igt_debug("Got %u report lost events\n", reports_lost);
>> +
>> + free(buf);
>> +}
>> +
>> static void
>> test_enable_disable(void)
>> {
>> @@ -4893,6 +4976,13 @@ igt_main
>> igt_subtest("buffer-fill")
>> test_buffer_fill();
>>
>> + igt_describe("Test that reason field in OA reports is never 0 on
>> Gen8+");
>> + igt_subtest("non-zero-reason") {
>> + /* Reason field is only available on Gen8+ */
>> + igt_require(intel_gen(devid) >= 8);
>> + test_non_zero_reason();
>> + }
>> +
>> igt_subtest("disabled-read-error")
>> test_disabled_read_error();
>> igt_subtest("non-sampling-read-error")
>> --
>> 2.29.2
>>
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-26 11:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-25 11:25 [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v2 0/3] tests/i915/perf: verify non zero reason field in OA reports Lionel Landwerlin
2020-11-25 11:25 ` [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v2 1/3] tests/i915/perf: constify report checks functions Lionel Landwerlin
2020-11-25 21:43 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2020-11-25 11:25 ` [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v2 2/3] tests/i915/perf: deal with 0 delta reports Lionel Landwerlin
2020-11-25 22:12 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2020-11-25 11:25 ` [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v2 3/3] tests/i915/perf: verify reason field in OA reports is never 0 Lionel Landwerlin
2020-11-25 22:35 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2020-11-26 11:40 ` Lionel Landwerlin [this message]
2020-11-25 12:25 ` [igt-dev] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for tests/i915/perf: verify non zero reason field in OA reports Patchwork
2020-11-25 13:57 ` [igt-dev] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
2020-11-25 14:08 ` Lionel Landwerlin
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=c40c0295-a533-a68d-8cb9-094408ab8d9e@intel.com \
--to=lionel.g.landwerlin@intel.com \
--cc=igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=umesh.nerlige.ramappa@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