[PATCH 1/3] tests/intel/xe_exec_system_allocator: Test to validate basic SVM functionality

[Matthew Brost]

On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 04:44:31PM -0600, Cavitt, Jonathan wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: igt-dev <igt-dev-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf Of sai.gowtham.ch at intel.com
> Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2025 10:07 AM
> To: igt-dev at lists.freedesktop.org; Ch, Sai Gowtham <sai.gowtham.ch at intel.com>; Ghimiray, Himal Prasad <himal.prasad.ghimiray at intel.com>; Brost, Matthew <matthew.brost at intel.com>
> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] tests/intel/xe_exec_system_allocator: Test to validate basic SVM functionality
> > 
> > From: Sai Gowtham Ch <sai.gowtham.ch at intel.com>
> > 
> > Basic test validates basic SVM functionlity.
> 
> s/functionlity/functionality
> 
> There's also a non-blocking comment below, but otherwise:
> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cavitt <jonathan.cavitt at intel.com>
> 

What? No. This existing tests already covers this case.

Matt

> > 
> > Cc: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray at intel.com>
> > Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost at intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Sai Gowtham Ch <sai.gowtham.ch at intel.com>
> > ---
> >  tests/intel/xe_exec_system_allocator.c | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 64 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tests/intel/xe_exec_system_allocator.c b/tests/intel/xe_exec_system_allocator.c
> > index 06daac8c2..ba11ed834 100644
> > --- a/tests/intel/xe_exec_system_allocator.c
> > +++ b/tests/intel/xe_exec_system_allocator.c
> > @@ -32,6 +32,8 @@
> >  struct batch_data {
> >  	uint32_t batch[16];
> >  	uint64_t pad;
> > +	uint64_t vm_sync;
> > +	uint64_t exec_sync;
> >  	uint32_t data;
> >  	uint32_t expected_data;
> >  };
> > @@ -405,6 +407,63 @@ static void __aligned_partial_free(struct aligned_alloc_type  *aligned_alloc_typ
> >  		       aligned_alloc_type->__size - aligned_alloc_type->size - begin_size);
> >  }
> >  
> > +/**
> > + * SUBTEST: basic-svm
> > + * Description: Test validates basic svm.
> > + * Test category: functionality test
> > + */
> > +static void test_basic(int fd, struct drm_xe_engine_class_instance *eci,
> > +		       size_t bo_size, int num_dwords)
> > +{
> > +	uint64_t addr;
> > +	struct drm_xe_sync sync[1] = {
> > +		{ .type = DRM_XE_SYNC_TYPE_USER_FENCE, .flags = DRM_XE_SYNC_FLAG_SIGNAL,
> > +		  .timeline_value = USER_FENCE_VALUE },
> > +	};
> > +	struct drm_xe_exec exec = {
> > +		.num_batch_buffer = 1,
> > +		.num_syncs = 1,
> > +		.syncs = to_user_pointer(sync),
> > +	};
> > +	struct batch_data *data;
> > +	uint32_t exec_queues, vm;
> > +	size_t aligned_size = bo_size ?: xe_get_default_alignment(fd);
> > +
> > +	vm = xe_vm_create(fd, DRM_XE_VM_CREATE_FLAG_LR_MODE | DRM_XE_VM_CREATE_FLAG_FAULT_MODE, 0);
> > +	data = aligned_alloc(aligned_size, bo_size);
> > +	igt_assert(data != NULL);
> > +	memset(data, 0, bo_size);
> > +
> > +	exec_queues = xe_exec_queue_create(fd, vm, eci, 0);
> > +	sync[0].addr = to_user_pointer(&data[0].vm_sync);
> > +	bind_system_allocator(sync, 1);
> > +	xe_wait_ufence(fd, &data[0].vm_sync, USER_FENCE_VALUE, 0, NSEC_PER_SEC);
> > +	data[0].vm_sync = 0;
> > +
> > +	addr = to_user_pointer(data);
> > +	for (int i = 0; i <= num_dwords; i++) {
> > +		uint64_t batch_offset = (char *)&data[i].batch - (char *)data;
> > +		uint64_t batch_addr = addr + batch_offset;
> > +		uint64_t sdi_offset = (char *)&(data[i].data) - (char *)data;
> > +		uint64_t sdi_addr = addr + sdi_offset;
> > +		int b = 0;
> > +
> > +		write_dword(data[i].batch, sdi_addr, WRITE_VALUE(&data[i], i), &b);
> > +		igt_assert(b <= ARRAY_SIZE(data[i].batch));
> > +
> > +		exec.exec_queue_id = exec_queues;
> > +		exec.address = batch_addr;
> > +		sync[0].addr = addr + (char *)&data[i].exec_sync - (char *)data;
> > +		xe_exec(fd, &exec);
> > +		xe_wait_ufence(fd, &data[i].exec_sync, USER_FENCE_VALUE, exec_queues, NSEC_PER_SEC);
> > +		data[i].exec_sync = 0;
> > +		igt_assert_eq(data[i].data, READ_VALUE(&data[i]));
> > +	}
> > +	unbind_system_allocator();
> > +	free(data);
> > +	xe_exec_queue_destroy(fd, exec_queues);
> > +	xe_vm_destroy(fd, vm);
> > +}
> >  /**
> >   * SUBTEST: unaligned-alloc
> >   * Description: allocate unaligned sizes of memory
> > @@ -1597,6 +1656,7 @@ struct section {
> >  
> >  igt_main
> >  {
> > +	struct drm_xe_engine *engine;
> >  	struct drm_xe_engine_class_instance *hwe;
> >  	const struct section sections[] = {
> >  		{ "malloc", 0 },
> > @@ -1695,11 +1755,15 @@ igt_main
> >  		fd = drm_open_driver(DRIVER_XE);
> >  		igt_require(!xe_supports_faults(fd));
> >  
> > +		engine = xe_engine(fd, 1);
> 
> Non-blocking:
> If you just need to get "any" engine, then you might be able to "hijack" the
> pre-existing drm_xe_engine_class_instance *hwe above for that purpose.
> Though, you'd need to declare it using a fixture beforehand.  Something like:
> 
> """
> igt_fixture {
> 	/* Get first engine */
> 	xe_for_each_engine(fd, hwe)
> 		break;
> }
> """
> 
> We could also still use xe_engine, but it doesn't look quite as elegant:
> 
> """
> igt_fixture {
> 	/* Get first engine */
> 	hwe = &xe_engine(fd, 1)->instance;
> }
> """
> 
> Then, the below subtest would look like:
> 
> """
> igt_subtest("basic_svm")
> 	test_basic(fd, hwe, SZ_64K, 1);
> """
> 
> Note that we'd also need to place the subtests in the next two patches
> after this fixture and before the subtest below it (once-%s), lest we need to
> repeat this fixture process again for those new subtests.
> 
> It's not particularly important we use the hwe in this way, so I won't block on it.
> But it would be nice to avoid any additional variables where we can.
> -Jonathan Cavitt
> 
> >  		xe = xe_device_get(fd);
> >  		va_bits = xe->va_bits;
> >  		open_sync_file();
> >  	}
> >  
> > +	igt_subtest("basic-svm")
> > +		test_basic(fd, &engine->instance, SZ_64K, 1);
> > +
> >  	for (const struct section *s = sections; s->name; s++) {
> >  		igt_subtest_f("once-%s", s->name)
> >  			xe_for_each_engine(fd, hwe)
> > -- 
> > 2.34.1
> > 
> >