Re: [PATCH 07/18] tests/gem_ctx_exec: mark lrc lite restore as basic

[Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>]

On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 01:31:30PM -0700, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> Need some LRC tests in the 'basic' subset, and this is a good simple
> one.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>

This is just a testcase for a very specific lrc corner case. We do already
exercise lrc with all the other execbuf testcases. Imo we're covered
enough already with what we have in the basic testset - testing for all 3
billion cornercases will make it grow out of scope I fear. I'd just drop
this one here as not needed for BAT.

If you want to extend execbuffer scope a bit then we should add a
concurrency test, i.e. one of the gem_concurrent_blt testcases as basic
ones. Unfortunately to be able to reliable trigger race conditions those
all take a few seconds. But inter-batch sync is a _big_ gap across all
archs, and something which is even more tricky with lrc (and scheduler).
Imo that would be a lot more useful than this test here.
-Daniel

> ---
>  tests/gem_ctx_exec.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/gem_ctx_exec.c b/tests/gem_ctx_exec.c
> index 3df939c..ea0fb7f 100644
> --- a/tests/gem_ctx_exec.c
> +++ b/tests/gem_ctx_exec.c
> @@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ igt_main
>  		gem_context_destroy(fd, ctx_id);
>  	}
>  
> -	igt_subtest("lrc-lite-restore") {
> +	igt_subtest("basic-lrc-lite-restore") {
>  		int i, j;
>  
>  		/*
> -- 
> 1.9.1
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx