From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH intel-gpu-tools] gem_ring_sync_copy: Add a
 ring to ring synchronization test
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 11:00:10 +0000
Message-ID: <20140204110010.GC29013@strange.amr.corp.intel.com>
References: <1391012257-25503-1-git-send-email-damien.lespiau@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49085FB4D3
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Tue,  4 Feb 2014 03:00:28 -0800 (PST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1391012257-25503-1-git-send-email-damien.lespiau@intel.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org
To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Cc: daniel.vetter@intel.com, benjamin.widawsky@intel.com
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 04:17:37PM +0000, Damien Lespiau wrote:
> +static void run_test(data_t *data, enum ring r1, enum ring r2, enum test test)
> +{
> +	struct ring_ops *r1_ops = &ops[r1];
> +	struct ring_ops *r2_ops = &ops[r2];
> +	drm_intel_bo *a, *b, *c;
> +
> +	a = bo_create(data, WIDTH, HEIGHT, 0xa);
> +	b = bo_create(data, WIDTH, HEIGHT, 0xb);
> +	c = bo_create(data, WIDTH, HEIGHT, 0xc);
> +
> +	r1_ops->busy(data);
> +	r2_ops->copy(data, a, b);
        ^^
	r1
> +
> +	switch (test) {
> +	case TEST_WRITE_READ:
> +		r2_ops->copy(data, b, c);
                ^^
> +		bo_check(data, c, 0xa);
> +		break;

Turns out I was copying a to b on r2, and then b to c still on r2. So
no inter-ring dependencies in that workload. Ooops.

Pushed an updated patch that copy a to b on r1 and then b to c on r2 and
verified that short-circuiting the semaphores breaks the test indeed.

-- 
Damien