Re: [PATCH] tests: Add gem_exec_params

Zhao Yakui
2014-04-24T08:28:08Z

On Thu, 2014-04-24 at 01:18 -0600, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Zhao Yakui <yakui.zhao@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-04-23 at 12:32 -0600, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >> This fills all the gaps we've had in our execbuf testing. Overflow
> >> testing of the various arrays is already done by gem_reloc_overflow.
> >>
> >> Also add kms_flip_tiling to .gitignore.
> >>
> >> This will cause a bunch of failures since current kernels don't catch
> >> all fallout.
> >>
> >
> > Very good patch. Except some small concerns, it is OK to me.
>
> Thanks for your comments, replies below.
> -Daniel
>
> >
> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> >> ---
> >> tests/.gitignore | 2 +
> >> tests/Makefile.sources | 1 +
> >> tests/gem_exec_params.c | 212 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> 3 files changed, 215 insertions(+)
> >> create mode 100644 tests/gem_exec_params.c
> >>
> >> diff --git a/tests/.gitignore b/tests/.gitignore
> >> index 146bab06b565..4c50bae93aa3 100644
> >> --- a/tests/.gitignore
> >> +++ b/tests/.gitignore
> >> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ gem_exec_blt
> >> gem_exec_faulting_reloc
> >> gem_exec_lut_handle
> >> gem_exec_nop
> >> +gem_exec_params
> >> gem_exec_parse
> >> gem_fd_exhaustion
> >> gem_fenced_exec_thrash
> >> @@ -113,6 +114,7 @@ kms_addfb
> >> kms_cursor_crc
> >> kms_fbc_crc
> >> kms_flip
> >> +kms_flip_tiling
> >> kms_pipe_crc_basic
> >> kms_plane
> >> kms_render
> >> diff --git a/tests/Makefile.sources b/tests/Makefile.sources
> >> index c957ace2ace0..9b2d7cff1113 100644
> >> --- a/tests/Makefile.sources
> >> +++ b/tests/Makefile.sources
> >> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ TESTS_progs_M = \
> >> gem_exec_bad_domains \
> >> gem_exec_faulting_reloc \
> >> gem_exec_nop \
> >> + gem_exec_params \
> >> gem_exec_parse \
> >> gem_fenced_exec_thrash \
> >> gem_fence_thrash \
> >> diff --git a/tests/gem_exec_params.c b/tests/gem_exec_params.c
> >> new file mode 100644
> >> index 000000000000..b1d996c530f5
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/tests/gem_exec_params.c
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,212 @@
> >> +/*
> >> + * Copyright (c) 2014 Intel Corporation
> >> + *
> >> + * Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a
> >> + * copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"),
> >> + * to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation
> >> + * the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense,
> >> + * and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the
> >> + * Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
> >> + *
> >> + * The above copyright notice and this permission notice (including the next
> >> + * paragraph) shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the
> >> + * Software.
> >> + *
> >> + * THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
> >> + * IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
> >> + * FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL
> >> + * THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
> >> + * LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING
> >> + * FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS
> >> + * IN THE SOFTWARE.
> >> + *
> >> + * Authors:
> >> + * Daniel Vetter
> >> + *
> >> + */
> >> +
> >> +#include <unistd.h>
> >> +#include <stdlib.h>
> >> +#include <stdint.h>
> >> +#include <stdio.h>
> >> +#include <string.h>
> >> +#include <fcntl.h>
> >> +#include <inttypes.h>
> >> +#include <errno.h>
> >> +#include <sys/stat.h>
> >> +#include <sys/ioctl.h>
> >> +#include <sys/time.h>
> >> +#include "drm.h"
> >> +
> >> +#include "ioctl_wrappers.h"
> >> +#include "drmtest.h"
> >> +#include "intel_io.h"
> >> +#include "intel_chipset.h"
> >> +#include "igt_aux.h"
> >> +
> >> +#define LOCAL_I915_EXEC_VEBOX (4<<0)
> >> +
> >> +struct drm_i915_gem_execbuffer2 execbuf;
> >> +struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 gem_exec[1];
> >> +uint32_t batch[2] = {MI_BATCH_BUFFER_END};
> >> +uint32_t handle, devid;
> >> +int fd;
> >> +
> >> +igt_main
> >> +{
> >> + igt_fixture {
> >> + fd = drm_open_any();
> >> +
> >> + devid = intel_get_drm_devid(fd);
> >> +
> >> + handle = gem_create(fd, 4096);
> >> + gem_write(fd, handle, 0, batch, sizeof(batch));
> >> +
> >> + gem_exec[0].handle = handle;
> >> + gem_exec[0].relocation_count = 0;
> >> + gem_exec[0].relocs_ptr = 0;
> >> + gem_exec[0].alignment = 0;
> >> + gem_exec[0].offset = 0;
> >> + gem_exec[0].flags = 0;
> >> + gem_exec[0].rsvd1 = 0;
> >> + gem_exec[0].rsvd2 = 0;
> >> +
> >> + execbuf.buffers_ptr = (uintptr_t)gem_exec;
> >> + execbuf.buffer_count = 1;
> >> + execbuf.batch_start_offset = 0;
> >> + execbuf.batch_len = 8;
> >
> > Can we use the sizeof(batch) instead of 8?
>
> We use noop batches like this all over the place and it's kinda all
> hard-coded magic numbers. Constructing execbufs manually is one of
> those areas in igt which are rather painful, but thus far I just
> didn't come up with a nice approach to it.
>
> Hence I think leaving all the brittle magic in there is ok ;-)

Understand. The magic number is no problem.

>
> >> + execbuf.cliprects_ptr = 0;
> >> + execbuf.num_cliprects = 0;
> >> + execbuf.DR1 = 0;
> >> + execbuf.DR4 = 0;
> >> + execbuf.flags = 0;
> >> + i915_execbuffer2_set_context_id(execbuf, 0);
> >> + execbuf.rsvd2 = 0;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + igt_subtest("control") {
> >> + igt_assert(drmIoctl(fd,
> >> + DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_EXECBUFFER2,
> >> + &execbuf) == 0);
> >> + execbuf.flags = I915_EXEC_RENDER;
> >> + igt_assert(drmIoctl(fd,
> >> + DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_EXECBUFFER2,
> >> + &execbuf) == 0);
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> +#define RUN_FAIL(expected_errno) do { \
> >> + igt_assert(drmIoctl(fd, \
> >> + DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_EXECBUFFER2, \
> >> + &execbuf) == -1); \
> >> + igt_assert_cmpint(errno, ==, expected_errno); \
> >> + } while(0)
> >> +
> >> + igt_subtest("no-bsd") {
> >> + igt_require(!gem_has_bsd(fd));
> >> + execbuf.flags = I915_EXEC_BSD;
> >> + RUN_FAIL(EINVAL);
> >> + }
> >> + igt_subtest("no-blt") {
> >> + igt_require(!gem_has_blt(fd));
> >> + execbuf.flags = I915_EXEC_BLT;
> >> + RUN_FAIL(EINVAL);
> >> + }
> >> + igt_subtest("no-vebox") {
> >> + igt_require(!gem_has_vebox(fd));
> >> + execbuf.flags = LOCAL_I915_EXEC_VEBOX;
> >> + RUN_FAIL(EINVAL);
> >> + }
> >> + igt_subtest("invalid-ring") {
> >> + execbuf.flags = LOCAL_I915_EXEC_VEBOX+1;
> >> + RUN_FAIL(EINVAL);
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + igt_subtest("rel-constants-invalid-ring") {
> >> + igt_require(gem_has_bsd(fd));
> >> + execbuf.flags = I915_EXEC_BSD | I915_EXEC_CONSTANTS_ABSOLUTE;
> >> + RUN_FAIL(EINVAL);
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + igt_subtest("rel-constants-invalid-rel-gen5") {
> >> + igt_require(intel_gen(devid) > 5);
> >> + execbuf.flags = I915_EXEC_RENDER | I915_EXEC_CONSTANTS_REL_SURFACE;
> >> + RUN_FAIL(EINVAL);
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + igt_subtest("rel-constants-invalid") {
> >> + execbuf.flags = I915_EXEC_RENDER | (I915_EXEC_CONSTANTS_REL_SURFACE+1);
> >> + RUN_FAIL(EINVAL);
> >
> > It seems that the exec.flags is the same as "I915_EXEC_BSD |
> > I915_EXEC_CONSTANTS_REL_SURFACE). And then it is similar to subtest of
> > rel-constants-invalid-ring. Not sure whether you are hoping to set the
> > flag as "I915_EXEC_RENDER | I915_EXEC_CONSTANTS_MASK"?
>
> They're three completely different checks:
> 1. checks for invalid flags on rings other than RENDER
> 2. checks for a specific invalid flag which doesn't exist on gen5+ any more
> 3. checks for a completely invalid flag (notice the + 1) on any platform
>
> All three cases hit different conditions in the execbuf validataion code.

I understand that they are completely different.

But as Ville mentioned, the definition of "
I915_EXEC_RENDER | (I915_EXEC_CONSTANTS_REL_SURFACE+1)" is bogus.
This is my point.

Maybe you are hoping the :
I915_EXEC_CONSTANTS_REL_SURFACE+(1<<6) or just
I915_EXEC_CONSTANTS_MASK

>
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + igt_subtest("sol-reset-invalid") {
> >> + igt_require(gem_has_bsd(fd));
> >> + execbuf.flags = I915_EXEC_BSD | I915_EXEC_GEN7_SOL_RESET;
> >> + RUN_FAIL(EINVAL);
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + igt_subtest("sol-reset-not-gen7") {
> >> + igt_require(intel_gen(devid) != 7);
> >> + execbuf.flags = I915_EXEC_RENDER | I915_EXEC_GEN7_SOL_RESET;
> >> + RUN_FAIL(EINVAL);
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + igt_subtest("secure-non-root") {
> >> + igt_fork(child, 1) {
> >> + igt_drop_root();
> >> +
> >> + execbuf.flags = I915_EXEC_RENDER | I915_EXEC_SECURE;
> >> + RUN_FAIL(EPERM);
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + igt_waitchildren();
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + igt_subtest("secure-non-master") {
> >> + do_or_die(drmDropMaster(fd));
> >> + execbuf.flags = I915_EXEC_RENDER | I915_EXEC_SECURE;
> >> + RUN_FAIL(EPERM);
> >> + do_or_die(drmSetMaster(fd));
> >> + igt_assert(drmIoctl(fd,
> >> + DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_EXECBUFFER2,
> >> + &execbuf) == 0);
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + /* HANDLE_LUT and NO_RELOC are already exercised by gem_exec_lut_handle */
> >> +
> >> + igt_subtest("invalid-flag") {
> >> + execbuf.flags = I915_EXEC_RENDER | (I915_EXEC_HANDLE_LUT << 1);
> >> + RUN_FAIL(EINVAL);
> >> + }
> >> +
> >
> > Can we use (random() & __I915_EXEC_UNKNOWN_FLAGS) for the invalid-flag
> > subtest?
>
> I've picked the very next flag since that will be the one we use for
> the next execbuf feature. If people fail to update this testcase then
> it will fail and I have a good excuse to scold them for not writing
> and running igt testcase ;-)
>
> So random() is imo less useful here.

OK. Understand it. Sorry for my incorrect understanding.

>
> >> + /* rsvd1 aka context id is already exercised by gem_ctx_bad_exec */
> >> +
> >> + igt_subtest("cliprects-invalid") {
> >> + igt_require(intel_gen(devid) >= 5);
> >> + execbuf.flags = 0;
> >> + execbuf.num_cliprects = 1;
> >> + RUN_FAIL(EINVAL);
> >> + execbuf.num_cliprects = 0;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> +#define DIRT(name) \
> >> + igt_subtest(#name "-dirt") { \
> >> + execbuf.flags = 0; \
> >> + execbuf.name = 1; \
> >> + RUN_FAIL(EINVAL); \
> >> + execbuf.name = 0; \
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + DIRT(rsvd2);
> >> + DIRT(cliprects_ptr);
> >> + DIRT(DR1);
> >> + DIRT(DR4);
> >> +#undef DIRT
> >> +
> >> +#undef RUN_FAIL
> >> +
> >> + igt_fixture {
> >> + gem_close(fd, handle);
> >> +
> >> + close(fd);
> >> + }
> >> +}
> >
> >
>
>
>