Re: [PATCH i-g-t 1/3] igt/gem_cpu_reloc: Check HW exists before attempting to use it

[Antonio Argenziano <antonio.argenziano@intel.com>]

On 17/05/18 08:37, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Antonio Argenziano (2018-05-17 16:08:14)
>>
>>
>> On 17/05/18 01:23, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>> Confirm we have the available HW before asserting it succeeds.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>> ---
>>>    tests/gem_cpu_reloc.c | 1 +
>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tests/gem_cpu_reloc.c b/tests/gem_cpu_reloc.c
>>> index 882c312d4..e3bbcd239 100644
>>> --- a/tests/gem_cpu_reloc.c
>>> +++ b/tests/gem_cpu_reloc.c
>>> @@ -167,6 +167,7 @@ static void run_test(int fd, int count)
>>>        use_blt = 0;
>>
>> Is this^ meant to be EXEC_DEFAULT?
> 
> Depends on your viewpoint. EXEC_DEFAULT is zero.

Just wandering if it should enforce EXEC_RENDER. Which I think is what 
we want for gen 5-.

> 
>>>        if (intel_gen(noop) >= 6)
>>>                use_blt = I915_EXEC_BLT;
>>> +     gem_require_ring(fd, use_blt);
>>
>> Are any gens 6+ that do not have a BLT ring? if that is the case
>> shouldn't we use '0' like we do for 5- gens?
> 
> No, it has to match the engine for which the blitter commands are valid. If
> that engine does not exist, there is no alternative except to rewrite the
> test not to use those commands. If there was, it indeed would be included
> in the selection above.

So, just to wrap my head around it, the commands we are talking about 
here are allowed on render for gen5- but only on blitter on 6+. Right?

Thanks,
Antonio

> -Chris
> 
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx