[PATCH] tests/intel/xe_exec_capture: Enhance test to check with DUMPABLE flag
Gurram, Pravalika
pravalika.gurram at intel.com
Tue Feb 11 04:34:54 UTC 2025
> -----Original Message-----
> From: igt-dev <igt-dev-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of Dong,
> Zhanjun
> Sent: Friday, February 7, 2025 8:46 PM
> To: igt-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] tests/intel/xe_exec_capture: Enhance test to check with
> DUMPABLE flag
>
>
>
> On 2025-02-07 10:05 a.m., Dong, Zhanjun wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2025-02-05 1:41 p.m., pravalika gurram wrote:
> >> check if the VM is there when DRM_XE_VM_BIND_FLAG_DUMPABLE is set in
> >> the generated devcoredump.
> >> check VM address within the range
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: pravalika gurram <pravalika.gurram at intel.com>
> >> ---
> >> tests/intel/xe_exec_capture.c | 64
> >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> >> 1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/tests/intel/xe_exec_capture.c b/tests/intel/
> >> xe_exec_capture.c index 55ec3d4bd..4eaa3f4d1 100644
> >> --- a/tests/intel/xe_exec_capture.c
> >> +++ b/tests/intel/xe_exec_capture.c
> >> @@ -53,16 +53,15 @@
> >> #define DUMP_PATH "/sys/class/drm/card%d/device/
> >> devcoredump/data"
> >> #define START_TAG "**** Job ****"
> >> -#define END_TAG "**** VM state ****"
> >> /* Optional Space */
> >> -#define SPC_O "[ \t]*"
> >> +#define SPC_O "[ \t\\.]*"
> >> /* Required Space */
> >> -#define SPC "[ \t]+"
> >> +#define SPC "[ \t\\.]+"
> >> /* Optional Non-Space */
> >> -#define NSPC_O "([^ \t]*)"
> >> +#define NSPC_O "([^ \t\\.]*)"
> >> /* Required Non-Space */
> >> -#define NSPC "([^ \t]+)"
> >> +#define NSPC "([^ \t\\.]+)"
> > Add "." as delimiter, that's fine.
> >
> >> #define BEG "^" SPC_O
> >> #define REQ_FIELD NSPC SPC
> >> #define REQ_FIELD_LAST NSPC SPC_O @@ -77,6 +76,8 @@
> >> #define INDEX_ENGINE_PHYSICAL 2
> >> #define INDEX_ENGINE_NAME 1
> >> #define INDEX_ENGINE_INSTANCE 4
> >> +#define INDEX_VM_LENGTH 2 #define INDEX_VM_SIZE
> >> +3
> >> static u64
> >> xe_sysfs_get_job_timeout_ms(int fd, struct
> >> drm_xe_engine_class_instance *eci) @@ -177,7 +178,8 @@
> >> test_legacy_mode(int fd, struct drm_xe_engine_class_instance *eci,
> >> int n_exec_qu
> >> };
> >> sync[0].handle = syncobj_create(fd, 0);
> >> - xe_vm_bind_async(fd, vm, 0, bo, 0, addr, bo_size, sync, 1);
> >> + __xe_vm_bind_assert(fd, vm, 0, bo, 0, addr, bo_size,
> >> + DRM_XE_VM_BIND_OP_MAP, flags, sync, 1, 0, 0);
> >> for (i = 0; i < n_execs; i++) {
> >> u64 base_addr = addr;
> >> @@ -287,10 +289,6 @@ static int load_all(FILE *fd, char **lines, char
> >> *buf)
> >> /* Only save up to MAX_LINE_LEN to buffer */
> >> safe_strncpy(lines[i++], buf, MAX_LINE_LEN);
> >> -
> >> - /* Stop on END_TAG */
> >> - if (!strncmp(END_TAG, buf, strlen(END_TAG)))
> >> - break;
> > The target line located after END_TAG and is at the end of dump,
> > that's why this search is removed. But could put comment in comment
> > message about this? Remove search for something need some description,
> > we don't want it to be removed silently.
> And add example line, like:
> 204 [1580001a0000].length: 0x10000
> in comments somewhere, like check_item_u64 or where it was called, make it
> easy to read.
>
> Regards,
> Zhanjun Dong
> >> }
> >> return start_line;
> >> }
> >> @@ -351,7 +349,6 @@ static char
> >> value = &line[match[target_index].rm_so];
> >> line[match[target_index].rm_eo] = '\0';
> >> }
> >> -
> >> if (key && value && strcmp(tag, key) == 0)
> >> return value;
> >> /* if key != tag, keep searching and loop to next line
> >> */ @@ -361,16 +358,44 @@ static char
> >> return NULL;
> >> }
> >> +static uint64_t
> >> +compare_hex_value(const char *output) {
> >> + char result[64];
> >> + uint64_t ret_val;
> >> + char *src = (char *)output, *dst = result;
> >> +
> >> + if (src[0] == '0' && (src[1] == 'x' || src[1] == 'X'))
> >> + src += 2;
> > this is works with "0x123" case, to skip the leading "0x"
> > how about "[0x123]" case?
if (*src == '[' || *src == ']') { ===> works for [0x123]
ret_val = strtoull(result, NULL, 16); this is skipping 0x output will be 123
Regards,
Pravlika
> >> +
> >> + while (*src) {
> >> + if (*src == '[' || *src == ']') {
> >> + src++;
> >> + continue;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + *dst = toupper((unsigned char)*src);
> >> + dst++;
> >> + src++;
> >> + }
> >> + *dst = '\0';
> >> + ret_val = strtoull(result, NULL, 16);
> >> + return ret_val;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> static void
> >> -check_item_u64(regex_t *regex, char **lines, const char *tag, u64
> >> addr_lo, u64 addr_hi)
> >> +check_item_u64(regex_t *regex, char **lines, const char *tag, u64
> >> addr_lo,
> >> + u64 addr_hi, int tag_index, int target_index)
> >> {
> >> u64 result;
> >> char *output;
> >> - igt_assert_f((output = get_coredump_item(regex, lines, tag,
> >> INDEX_KEY, INDEX_VALUE)),
> >> + igt_assert_f((output = get_coredump_item(regex, lines, tag,
> >> tag_index, target_index)),
> >> "Target not found:%s\n", tag);
> >> - result = strtoul(output, NULL, 16);
> >> - igt_debug("Compare %s %s vs [0x%lX-0x%lX]\n", tag, output,
> >> addr_lo, addr_hi);
> >> +
> >> + result = compare_hex_value(output);
> >> + igt_debug("Compare %s %s vs [0x%lX-0x%lX] result %lX\n", tag,
> >> output,
> >> + addr_lo, addr_hi, result);
> >> igt_assert_f((addr_lo <= result) && (result <= addr_hi),
> >> "value %lX out of range[0x%lX-0x%lX]\n", result,
> >> addr_lo, addr_hi);
> >> }
> >> @@ -435,7 +460,7 @@ static void test_card(int fd)
> >> igt_debug("Running on engine class: %x instance: %x\n",
> >> hwe-
> >> >engine_class,
> >> hwe->engine_instance);
> >> - test_legacy_mode(fd, hwe, 1, 1, 0, addr);
> >> + test_legacy_mode(fd, hwe, 1, 1,
> >> +DRM_XE_VM_BIND_FLAG_DUMPABLE,
> >> addr);
> >> /* Wait 1 sec for devcoredump complete */
> >> sleep(1);
> >> @@ -451,10 +476,13 @@ static void test_card(int fd)
> >> check_item_str(®ex, lines, "Capture_source:", INDEX_KEY,
> >> INDEX_VALUE,
> >> "GuC", false);
> >> +
> >> check_item_u64(®ex, lines, "ACTHD:", addr,
> >> - addr + BATCH_DW_COUNT * sizeof(u32));
> >> + addr + BATCH_DW_COUNT * sizeof(u32), INDEX_KEY,
> >> INDEX_VALUE);
> >> check_item_u64(®ex, lines, "RING_BBADDR:", addr,
> >> - addr + BATCH_DW_COUNT * sizeof(u32));
> >> + addr + BATCH_DW_COUNT * sizeof(u32), INDEX_KEY,
> >> INDEX_VALUE);
> >> + check_item_u64(®ex, lines, "length:", addr,
> >> + addr + BATCH_DW_COUNT * sizeof(u32), INDEX_VALUE,
> >> INDEX_KEY);
> >> /* clear devcoredump */
> >> rm_devcoredump(path);
> >
More information about the igt-dev
mailing list