[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v4] benchmarks/gem_wsim: Command submission workload simulator

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 20/04/2017 15:33, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 03:23:27PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
>> You either want to reset presumed_offset=-1 each time, or better for all
>> concerned write the correct address alongside the seqno (which also
>> enables NORELOC).
>>
>> Delta incoming.
>
> See attached.
>
> Next concern is that I have full rings which implies that we are not
> waiting on each batch before resubmitting with a new seqno?
>
> If I throw a assert(!busy(batch_bo)) before the *b->mapped_seqno am I
> going to be upset?

Yes you would. :) I had a sync (as a move to cpu domain) before seqno 
update in the last version but it disappeared as I was fixing the whole 
area of seqno tracking. So the balancing results in the patch are bogus 
since the seqno can jump to latest ahead of the time...

Regards,

Tvrtko