[igt-dev] [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] i915_pm_freq_api: Add some debug to tests
Dixit, Ashutosh
ashutosh.dixit at intel.com
Sat Jul 8 19:36:15 UTC 2023
On Fri, 07 Jul 2023 16:23:59 -0700, Vinay Belgaumkar wrote:
>
> Some subtests seem to be failing in CI, use igt_assert_(lt/eq) which
> print the values being compared and some additional debug as well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vinay Belgaumkar <vinay.belgaumkar at intel.com>
> ---
> tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c | 18 ++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c b/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
> index 522abee35..cdb2e70ca 100644
> --- a/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
> +++ b/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
> @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ static void test_freq_basic_api(int dirfd, int gt)
> rpn = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RPn_FREQ_MHZ);
> rp0 = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RP0_FREQ_MHZ);
> rpe = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RP1_FREQ_MHZ);
> + igt_debug("RPn: %d, RPe: %d, RP0: %d", rpn, rpe, rp0);
Print gt here too.
>
> /*
> * Negative bound tests
> @@ -90,21 +91,18 @@ static void test_reset(int i915, int dirfd, int gt, int count)
> int fd;
>
> for (int i = 0; i < count; i++) {
> - igt_assert_f(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0,
> - "Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
> - igt_assert_f(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0,
> - "Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
> + igt_debug("Running cycle: %d", i);
> + igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
> + igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
> usleep(ACT_FREQ_LATENCY_US);
> - igt_assert_f(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn,
> - "Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
> + igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
>
> /* Manually trigger a GT reset */
> fd = igt_debugfs_gt_open(i915, gt, "reset", O_WRONLY);
> igt_require(fd >= 0);
> igt_ignore_warn(write(fd, "1\n", 2));
>
> - igt_assert_f(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn,
> - "Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
> + igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
Probably ok but why the changes in this loop?
> }
> close(fd);
> }
> @@ -116,13 +114,13 @@ static void test_suspend(int i915, int dirfd, int gt)
> igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
> igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
> usleep(ACT_FREQ_LATENCY_US);
> - igt_assert(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn);
> + igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
>
> /* Manually trigger a suspend */
> igt_system_suspend_autoresume(SUSPEND_STATE_S3,
> SUSPEND_TEST_NONE);
>
> - igt_assert(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn);
> + igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
> }
>
> int i915 = -1;
> --
> 2.38.1
>
More information about the igt-dev
mailing list