[PATCH i-g-t 1/2] Revert "tests/intel/xe_pm_residency: Add an assertion on MI_STORE execution time"

[Gupta, Anshuman]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cavitt, Jonathan <jonathan.cavitt at intel.com>
> Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 11:01 PM
> To: Ghimiray, Himal Prasad <himal.prasad.ghimiray at intel.com>; igt-
> dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: Ghimiray, Himal Prasad <himal.prasad.ghimiray at intel.com>; Brost,
> Matthew <matthew.brost at intel.com>; Nilawar, Badal
> <badal.nilawar at intel.com>; Tauro, Riana <riana.tauro at intel.com>; Gupta,
> Anshuman <anshuman.gupta at intel.com>; Poosa, Karthik
> <karthik.poosa at intel.com>; Cavitt, Jonathan <jonathan.cavitt at intel.com>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH i-g-t 1/2] Revert "tests/intel/xe_pm_residency: Add an
> assertion on MI_STORE execution time"
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: igt-dev <igt-dev-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of Himal
> Prasad Ghimiray
> Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 10:24 AM
> To: igt-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: Ghimiray, Himal Prasad <himal.prasad.ghimiray at intel.com>; Brost,
> Matthew <matthew.brost at intel.com>; Nilawar, Badal
> <badal.nilawar at intel.com>; Tauro, Riana <riana.tauro at intel.com>; Gupta,
> Anshuman <anshuman.gupta at intel.com>; Poosa, Karthik
> <karthik.poosa at intel.com>
> Subject: [PATCH i-g-t 1/2] Revert "tests/intel/xe_pm_residency: Add an assertion
> on MI_STORE execution time"
> >
> > The reported time does not reflect the completion time of
> > MI_STORE_DWORD; instead, it accounts for the delay in the scheduler.
> > Therefore, it represents the time taken between xe_exec and
> > syncobj_wait.
But above doesn't justify removal of assertion.
We can increase the assertion time here but it is not advisable to remove the assertion here.

CC: @Vivi, Rodrigo
CC: @Brost, Matthew

What you opinion here igt_assert on time taken by xe_exec and syncobj_wait ?

Thanks,
Anshuman Gupta

> >
> > This reverts commit 92825ed72be61c5419d95db944fef1c9dda2215a.
> >
> > Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost at intel.com>
> > Cc: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar at intel.com>
> > Cc: Riana Tauro <riana.tauro at intel.com>
> > Cc: Anshuman Gupta <anshuman.gupta at intel.com>
> > Cc: Karthik Poosa <karthik.poosa at intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray at intel.com>
> 
> Seems good.
> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cavitt <jonathan.cavitt at intel.com> -Jonathan Cavitt
> 
> > ---
> >  tests/intel/xe_pm_residency.c | 9 ---------
> >  1 file changed, 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tests/intel/xe_pm_residency.c
> > b/tests/intel/xe_pm_residency.c index 772fe9b57..f4d05889c 100644
> > --- a/tests/intel/xe_pm_residency.c
> > +++ b/tests/intel/xe_pm_residency.c
> > @@ -144,15 +144,6 @@ static void exec_load(int fd, struct
> drm_xe_engine_class_instance *hwe, unsigned
> >  			  1e-3 * submit,
> >  			  1e-3 * (elapsed - submit));
> >
> > -		/*
> > -		 * MI_STORE_DWORD generally completes within couple of
> ms.
> > -		 * Assert if it takes more than 1.2 seconds, as it will cause
> > -		 * IGT test to timeout due to sleep of 120 seconds which is
> > -		 * the current per test timeout. Currently there is no way to
> > -		 * read this timeout from IGT test.
> > -		 */
> > -		igt_assert((uint64_t)elapsed < (uint64_t)(1.2 *
> NSEC_PER_SEC));
> > -
> >  		syncobj_reset(fd, &syncobj, 1);
> >
> >  		/*
> > --
> > 2.34.1
> >
> >