[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 4/3] tests/gem_ctx_param_basic: Expand ctx_param tests

[Daniel Vetter]

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 12:44:53PM +0300, David Weinehall wrote:
> tests/gem_ctx_param_basic: Expand ctx_param tests
> 
> Expand the context parameter tests to cover the
> no-zeromap parameter.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Weinehall <david.weinehall at intel.com>
> ---
>  gem_ctx_param_basic.c |   24 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c b/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c
> index b44b37cf0538..ba9366d1a679 100644
> --- a/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c
> +++ b/tests/gem_ctx_param_basic.c
> @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ igt_main
>  		ctx_param.size = 0;
>  	}
>  
> -	ctx_param.param  = LOCAL_CONTEXT_PARAM_BAN_PERIOD + 1;
> +	ctx_param.param  = I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_NO_ZEROMAP + 1;

Please respin this one with a LOCAL_ define for NO_ZEROMAP. We generally
don't want to have a hard coupling between the headers in libdrm and igt,
would mean a libdrm release roughly every week ;-)

>  
>  	igt_subtest("invalid-param-get") {
>  		ctx_param.context = ctx;
> @@ -132,6 +132,28 @@ igt_main
>  		TEST_SUCCESS(LOCAL_IOCTL_I915_GEM_CONTEXT_SETPARAM);
>  	}
>  
> +	ctx_param.param  = LOCAL_CONTEXT_PARAM_NO_ZEROMAP;
> +
> +	igt_subtest("non-root-set-no-zeromap") {
> +		igt_fork(child, 1) {
> +			igt_drop_root();
> +
> +			ctx_param.context = ctx;
> +			TEST_SUCCESS(LOCAL_IOCTL_I915_GEM_CONTEXT_GETPARAM);
> +			ctx_param.value--;
> +			TEST_FAIL(LOCAL_IOCTL_I915_GEM_CONTEXT_SETPARAM, EPERM);
> +		}
> +
> +		igt_waitchildren();
> +	}
> +
> +	igt_subtest("root-set-no-zeromap") {
> +		ctx_param.context = ctx;
> +		TEST_SUCCESS(LOCAL_IOCTL_I915_GEM_CONTEXT_GETPARAM);
> +		ctx_param.value--;
> +		TEST_SUCCESS(LOCAL_IOCTL_I915_GEM_CONTEXT_SETPARAM);
> +	}

A simple functional test here which does:
a) an execbuf with just 1 batch. With full ppgtt you should get that one
at offset 0. If not, skip the testcase.
b) set the NO_ZEROMAP property.
c) re-run the same batch, assert that now the buffer is relocated to
something non-0.

Just to make sure we have a bare minimal testcase to make sure we don't
break this.

Thanks, Daniel

> +
>  	igt_fixture
>  		close(fd);
>  }
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch