[igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t 02/17] igt/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread: Check for known swizzling
Tvrtko Ursulin
tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com
Thu Jul 5 12:30:57 UTC 2018
On 05/07/2018 12:14, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-07-02 13:00:07)
>>
>> On 02/07/2018 10:07, Chris Wilson wrote:
>>> As we want to compare a templated tiling pattern against the target_bo,
>>> we need to know that the swizzling is compatible. Or else the two
>>> tiling pattern may differ due to underlying page address that we cannot
>>> know, and so the test may sporadically fail.
>>>
>>> References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102575
>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
>>> ---
>>> tests/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tests/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread.c b/tests/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread.c
>>> index fe573c37c..83c57c07d 100644
>>> --- a/tests/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread.c
>>> +++ b/tests/gem_tiled_partial_pwrite_pread.c
>>> @@ -249,6 +249,24 @@ static void test_partial_read_writes(void)
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static bool known_swizzling(uint32_t handle)
>>> +{
>>> + struct drm_i915_gem_get_tiling2 {
>>> + uint32_t handle;
>>> + uint32_t tiling_mode;
>>> + uint32_t swizzle_mode;
>>> + uint32_t phys_swizzle_mode;
>>> + } arg = {
>>> + .handle = handle,
>>> + };
>>> +#define DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_GET_TILING2 DRM_IOWR (DRM_COMMAND_BASE + DRM_I915_GEM_GET_TILING, struct
>>
>> Can't we rely on this being in system headers by now?
>>
>> drm_i915_gem_get_tiling2)
>>> +
>>> + if (igt_ioctl(fd, DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_GET_TILING2, &arg))
>>> + return false;
>>> +
>>> + return arg.phys_swizzle_mode == arg.swizzle_mode;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> igt_main
>>> {
>>> uint32_t tiling_mode = I915_TILING_X;
>>> @@ -271,6 +289,12 @@ igt_main
>>> &tiling_mode, &scratch_pitch, 0);
>>> igt_assert(tiling_mode == I915_TILING_X);
>>> igt_assert(scratch_pitch == 4096);
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * As we want to compare our template tiled pattern against
>>> + * the target bo, we need consistent swizzling on both.
>>> + */
>>> + igt_require(known_swizzling(scratch_bo->handle));
>>> staging_bo = drm_intel_bo_alloc(bufmgr, "staging bo", BO_SIZE, 4096);
>>> tiled_staging_bo = drm_intel_bo_alloc_tiled(bufmgr, "scratch bo", 1024,
>>> BO_SIZE/4096, 4,
>>>
>>
>> Another option could be to keep allocating until we found one in the
>> memory area with compatible swizzling? Like this it may be some noise in
>> the test pass<->skip transitions.
>
> It depends on physical layout which the kernel keeps hidden (for
> understandable reasons).
Yeah, but we could allocate more and more until we end up in the area
where args.phys_swizzle_mode == args.swizzle_mode. Might be to heavy
approach. But then this skip can be random depending on what physical
memory gets allocated in each test run.
Regards,
Tvrtko
More information about the igt-dev
mailing list