[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3] [i-g-t] tests/gem_ppgtt: Check for vm leaks with flink and ppgtt

[Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele]

On 4/23/2015 12:36 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:23:17PM +0100, daniele.ceraolospurio at intel.com wrote:
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>>
>> Using imported objects should not leak i915 vmas (and vms).
>>
>> In practice this simulates Xorg importing fbcon and leaking (or not) one vma
>> per Xorg startup cycle.
>>
>> v2: use low-level ioctl wrappers and bo offset to check the leak (Chris)
>> v3: use the flinked bo as batch (Chris)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio at intel.com> (v2+)
>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
>> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>
> Bikeshedding for fun aside,
> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
>
>> +static uint64_t exec_and_get_offset(int fd, uint32_t batch)
>> +{
>> +	struct drm_i915_gem_execbuffer2 execbuf;
>> +	struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 exec[1];
>> +	uint32_t batch_data[2] = { MI_NOOP, MI_BATCH_BUFFER_END };
>
> uint32_t buf[2] = { MI_BATCH_BUFFER_END };
>
>> +
>> +	gem_write(fd, batch, 0, batch_data, sizeof(batch_data));
>> +
>> +	memset(exec, 0, sizeof(exec));
>> +	exec[0].handle = batch;
>> +	exec[0].relocation_count = 0;
>> +	exec[0].relocs_ptr = 0;
>
> We just memset(0) these two, so we don't need to clear them again.
>
>> +	memset(&execbuf, 0, sizeof(execbuf));
>> +	execbuf.buffers_ptr = (uintptr_t)exec;
>> +	execbuf.buffer_count = 1;
>> +	execbuf.batch_len = sizeof(batch_data);
>> +	execbuf.flags = 0;
> These two can also happily disappear.

Ok for the execbuf.flags and for the other fixes, but why remove also 
execbuf.batch_len?

Thanks,
Daniele

>
>> +	gem_execbuf(fd, &execbuf);
>
> igt_assert_neq(exec[0].offset, -1)
> -Chris
>