[igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/i915/gem_ctx_exec: Skip test for RCS+CCS

[Dixit, Ashutosh]

On Tue, 28 Dec 2021 23:52:39 -0800, <priyanka.dandamudi at intel.com> wrote:
>
> From: Priyanka Dandamudi <priyanka.dandamudi at intel.com>
>
> Updated the nohangcheck test to skip for DG2
> as test fails when reset is applied for the RCS+CCS combination.
>
> Signed-off-by: Priyanka Dandamudi <priyanka.dandamudi at intel.com>
> Cc: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison at Intel.com>
> Cc: Melkaveri, Arjun <arjun.melkaveri at intel.com>
> ---
>  tests/i915/gem_ctx_exec.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_ctx_exec.c b/tests/i915/gem_ctx_exec.c
> index a1270a88..dbb46404 100644
> --- a/tests/i915/gem_ctx_exec.c
> +++ b/tests/i915/gem_ctx_exec.c
> @@ -276,6 +276,9 @@ static void nohangcheck_hostile(int i915)
>	int err = 0;
>	int dir;
>	uint64_t ahnd;
> +	bool rcs_found = false;
> +	bool ccs_found = false;
> +

Extra newline.

>
>	/*
>	 * Even if the user disables hangcheck during their context,
> @@ -293,6 +296,17 @@ static void nohangcheck_hostile(int i915)
>
>	igt_require(__enable_hangcheck(dir, false));
>
> +	for_each_ctx_engine(i915, ctx, e) {
> +		if(rcs_found && ccs_found)

Need space before opening bracket (both "(" and "{"), everywhere.

> +			break;
> +		else if(e->class == I915_ENGINE_CLASS_RENDER && rcs_found == false){

No need for rcs_found check.

> +			rcs_found = true;
> +			continue;

No need for 'continue' since we have an "else if".

> +		}
> +		else if(e->class == I915_ENGINE_CLASS_COMPUTE && ccs_found == false)

No need for ccs_found check.

> +			ccs_found = true;
> +	}
> +	igt_require(!(rcs_found && ccs_found));

This one I am not sure of. Do RCS + CCS have dependent resets only for
particular products so that this check would unnecessarily skip on future
products where such dependence may not exist? How has this been handled
elsewhere?

>	for_each_ctx_engine(i915, ctx, e) {
>		igt_spin_t *spin;
>		int new;
> --
> 2.25.1
>