[igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t 7/8] tests/sriov_basic: validate driver binding to VFs
Michal Wajdeczko
michal.wajdeczko at intel.com
Mon Nov 6 22:59:48 UTC 2023
On 06.11.2023 20:59, Lukasz Laguna wrote:
> From: Katarzyna Dec <katarzyna.dec at intel.com>
>
> Test enables VFs in range <1..totalvfs>, bind driver to all of them and
> then unbind driver from all of them.
commit message seems outdated
>
> Signed-off-by: Katarzyna Dec <katarzyna.dec at intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Laguna <lukasz.laguna at intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Laguna <lukasz.laguna at intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Marcin Bernatowicz <marcin.bernatowicz at linux.intel.com>
> ---
> tests/sriov_basic.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 51 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tests/sriov_basic.c b/tests/sriov_basic.c
> index fc0914962..179731daf 100644
> --- a/tests/sriov_basic.c
> +++ b/tests/sriov_basic.c
> @@ -61,6 +61,38 @@ static void probe_disable_vfs(int pf_fd, unsigned int num_vfs)
> igt_assert(!err);
> }
>
> +/**
> + * SUBTEST: enable-vfs-bind-all-unbind-all
> + * Description:
> + * Verify VFs enabling, binding the driver and then unbinding it from all of them
> + */
> +static void enable_vfs_bind_all_unbind_all(int pf_fd, unsigned int num_vfs)
> +{
> + igt_debug("Using num_vfs=%u\n", num_vfs);
nit: "Testing %u VFs" ?
> +
> + igt_require(igt_sriov_get_enabled_vfs(pf_fd) == 0);
duplicates main fixture
> + igt_warn_on(!igt_sriov_disable_driver_autoprobe(pf_fd));
> + igt_skip_on(igt_sriov_is_driver_autoprobe_enabled(pf_fd));
why do we need warn/skip here ?
can't we just assert that 'disable' worked ?
> +
> + igt_warn_on(!igt_sriov_enable_vfs(pf_fd, num_vfs));
can't we just assert ?
> + igt_assert_eq(num_vfs, igt_sriov_get_enabled_vfs(pf_fd));
why we care here ? if not all are enabled then we fail just later
and this is not a test for "enable VFs" that enabled==requested
> + igt_warn_on(!igt_sriov_enable_driver_autoprobe(pf_fd));
> + igt_assert(igt_sriov_is_driver_autoprobe_enabled(pf_fd));
can't we just warn ?
if that we fail to enable then probe below will fail anyway
> +
> + for (int i = 1; i <= num_vfs; i++) {
> + igt_assert(!igt_sriov_is_vf_drm_driver_probed(pf_fd, i));
> + igt_assert(igt_sriov_bind_vf_drm_driver(pf_fd, i));
> + igt_assert(igt_sriov_is_vf_drm_driver_probed(pf_fd, i));
shouldn't we just "expect" to make sure to call "disable VFs" ?
> + }
> +
> + for (int i = 1; i <= num_vfs; i++) {
> + igt_assert(igt_sriov_unbind_vf_drm_driver(pf_fd, i));
> + igt_assert(!igt_sriov_is_vf_drm_driver_probed(pf_fd, i));
do we need to have all VFs loaded ?
maybe for BAT test we can just bind/unload one VF at the time ?
otherwise it will be almost the same level of stress as in
"enable-vfs-autoprobe-on" but with 'manual probe' loop of all VFs
> + }
> +
> + igt_assert(igt_sriov_disable_vfs(pf_fd));
> +}
> +
> igt_main
> {
> int pf_fd;
> @@ -113,6 +145,25 @@ igt_main
> }
> }
>
> + igt_describe("Verify VFs enabling, binding the driver and then unbinding it from all of them");
> + igt_subtest_with_dynamic("enable-vfs-bind-all-unbind-all") {
> + for_each_num_vfs(pf_fd, num_vfs) {
> + igt_dynamic_f("numvfs-%u", num_vfs) {
> + enable_vfs_bind_all_unbind_all(pf_fd, num_vfs);
> + }
> + }
> + for_random_num_vfs(pf_fd, num_vfs) {
> + igt_dynamic_f("numvfs-random") {
> + enable_vfs_bind_all_unbind_all(pf_fd, num_vfs);
> + }
> + }
> + for_max_num_vfs(pf_fd, num_vfs) {
> + igt_dynamic_f("numvfs-all") {
> + enable_vfs_bind_all_unbind_all(pf_fd, num_vfs);
> + }
> + }
> + }
> +
> igt_fixture {
> igt_sriov_disable_vfs(pf_fd);
> /* abort to avoid execution of next tests with enabled VFs */
More information about the igt-dev
mailing list