[PATCH i-g-t] tests/intel/xe_drm_fdinfo: Add test to check for active contexts

[Lucas De Marchi]

On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 10:49:37AM +0530, Riana Tauro wrote:
>Hi Umesh
>
>On 4/26/2025 12:51 AM, Umesh Nerlige Ramappa wrote:
>>Add a test to check if fdinfo returns the correct ticks when querying
>>utilization for a context that is currently active on the engine.
>>
>>Signed-off-by: Umesh Nerlige Ramappa <umesh.nerlige.ramappa at intel.com>
>>---
>>  tests/intel/xe_drm_fdinfo.c | 12 ++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
>>
>>diff --git a/tests/intel/xe_drm_fdinfo.c b/tests/intel/xe_drm_fdinfo.c
>>index 9a8811b4cd2f..73346ee9b1da 100644
>>--- a/tests/intel/xe_drm_fdinfo.c
>>+++ b/tests/intel/xe_drm_fdinfo.c
>>@@ -48,6 +48,9 @@
>>   * SUBTEST: utilization-single-full-load
>>   * Description: Check that each engine shows full load
>>   *
>>+ * SUBTEST: utilization-single-active-full-load
>>+ * Description: Check that each engine shows full load when active
>>+ *
>>   * SUBTEST: utilization-single-full-load-isolation
>>   * Description: Check that each engine load does not spill over to other drm clients
>>   *
>>@@ -456,6 +459,9 @@ utilization_single(int fd, struct drm_xe_engine_class_instance *hwe, unsigned in
>>  	if (flags & TEST_ISOLATION)
>>  		read_engine_cycles(new_fd, pceu2[1]);
>>+	if (cork && !cork->ended)
>>+		xe_cork_sync_end(fd, cork);

wouldn't it be better to add a flag to be explicit about the test
behavior?

right now we have the following combinations:

	- 0
	- TEST_BUSY | TEST_TRAILING_IDLE
	- TEST_BUSY | TEST_TRAILING_IDLE | TEST_ISOLATION

TEST_TRAILING_IDLE is kind of pointless right now as it's actually tied
to TEST_BUSY. Doesn't make sense without it, does it? So yeah, maybe
drop the TEST_TRAILING_IDLE flag and add one for this.

I'd call it utilization-single-full-load-while-active. And update the
doc on top of the function to differentiate them.

Lucas De Marchi

>>+
>>  	expected_load = flags & TEST_BUSY ?
>>  	       EXPECTED_LOAD_FULL : EXPECTED_LOAD_IDLE;
>>@@ -769,6 +775,12 @@ igt_main
>>  			utilization_single(xe, hwe, 0);
>>  	}
>>+	igt_subtest("utilization-single-active-full-load") {
>>+		require_engine_utilization_data(xe);
>>+		xe_for_each_engine(xe, hwe)
>>+			utilization_single(xe, hwe, TEST_BUSY);
>>+	}
>>+
>the trailing test can be renamed to load-idle and this to full load
>
>Test looks good to me
>
>Reviewed-by: Riana Tauro <riana.tauro at intel.com>
>
>>  	igt_subtest("utilization-single-full-load") {
>>  		require_engine_utilization_data(xe);
>>  		xe_for_each_engine(xe, hwe)