[PATCH i-g-t 1/2] tests/intel/xe_pmu: Unprovision VFs on cleanup

[K V P, Satyanarayana]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bernatowicz, Marcin <marcin.bernatowicz at linux.intel.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 6, 2025 6:36 PM
> To: K V P, Satyanarayana <satyanarayana.k.v.p at intel.com>; igt-
> dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> Cc: Kolakowski, Jakub1 <jakub1.kolakowski at intel.com>; Tauro, Riana
> <riana.tauro at intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH i-g-t 1/2] tests/intel/xe_pmu: Unprovision VFs on cleanup
> 
> 
> 
> On 5/6/2025 2:51 PM, K V P, Satyanarayana wrote:
> > Hi.
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Marcin Bernatowicz <marcin.bernatowicz at linux.intel.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 6, 2025 3:46 PM
> >> To: igt-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> >> Cc: Marcin Bernatowicz <marcin.bernatowicz at linux.intel.com>;
> Kolakowski,
> >> Jakub1 <jakub1.kolakowski at intel.com>; Tauro, Riana
> >> <riana.tauro at intel.com>; K V P, Satyanarayana
> >> <satyanarayana.k.v.p at intel.com>
> >> Subject: [PATCH i-g-t 1/2] tests/intel/xe_pmu: Unprovision VFs on cleanup
> >>
> >> Unprovision VFs to ensure a clean state for subsequent tests.
> >> Rename disable_vfs() to unprovision_and_disable_vfs() to reflect the
> >> additional cleanup steps.
> >>
> >> Cc: Jakub Kolakowski <jakub1.kolakowski at intel.com>
> >> Cc: Riana Tauro <riana.tauro at intel.com>
> >> Cc: Satyanarayana K V P <satyanarayana.k.v.p at intel.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Marcin Bernatowicz <marcin.bernatowicz at linux.intel.com>
> >> ---
> >>   tests/intel/xe_pmu.c | 11 +++++++----
> >>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/tests/intel/xe_pmu.c b/tests/intel/xe_pmu.c
> >> index 094dc0c6c..8cbbf6916 100644
> >> --- a/tests/intel/xe_pmu.c
> >> +++ b/tests/intel/xe_pmu.c
> >> @@ -497,12 +497,15 @@ static unsigned int
> enable_and_provision_vfs(int
> >> fd)
> >>   	return num_vfs;
> >>   }
> >>
> >> -static void disable_vfs(int fd)
> >> +static void unprovision_and_disable_vfs(int fd)
> >>   {
> >> -	unsigned int gt;
> >> +	unsigned int gt, num_vfs = igt_sriov_get_enabled_vfs(fd);
> >>
> >> -	xe_for_each_gt(fd, gt)
> >> +	xe_for_each_gt(fd, gt) {
> >>   		xe_sriov_set_sched_if_idle(fd, gt, 0);
> >> +		for (int fn = 0; fn <= num_vfs; fn++)
> >> +			xe_sriov_set_exec_quantum_ms(fd, fn, gt, 0);
> >> +	}
> >>
> > Do we need to set exec quantum for VFs, when un-provisioning and
> disabling VFs?
> > Any specific reason for doing this?
> > -Satya.
> 
> The settings stored by PF persist across VF enable/disable cycles.
> --
> marcin
> 
LGTM.
Reviewed-by: Satyanarayana K V P <satyanarayana.k.v.p at intel.com>
> >>   	igt_sriov_disable_vfs(fd);
> >>   	/* abort to avoid execution of next tests with enabled VFs */
> >> @@ -596,7 +599,7 @@ igt_main
> >>   		}
> >>
> >>   		igt_fixture
> >> -			disable_vfs(fd);
> >> +			unprovision_and_disable_vfs(fd);
> >>   	}
> >>
> >>   	igt_subtest_group {
> >> --
> >> 2.31.1
> >