[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v4] pm_rps: Changes in waitboost scenario

[Szwichtenberg, Radoslaw]

On Mon, 2017-08-28 at 10:50 +0200, Katarzyna Dec wrote:
> CI is observing sporadical failures in pm_rps subtests.
> There are a couple of reasons. One of them is the fact that
> on gen6, gen7 and gen7.5, max frequency (as in the HW limit)
> is not set to RP0, but the value obtaind from PCODE (which
> may be different from RP0). Thus the test is operating under
> wrong assumptions (SOFTMAX == RP0 == BOOST which is simply
> not the case). Let's compare current frequency with BOOST
> frequency rather than SOFTMAX to get the test behaviour under control.
> In boost_freq function I set MAX freq to midium freqency, which ensures
> that we for sure reach BOOST frequency. This could help with failures
> with boost frequency failing to drop down.
> GPU reset needs to be modified so we are not dependent on kernel's low
> priority retire worker. Reset method was replaced by igt_force_gpu_reset()
> and in reset testcase we make sure that we can recover from hang.
> 
> v2: Commit message, simplified waiting for boost to finish, drop
> noisy whitespace cleanup.
> 
> v3: Removed reading from i915_rps_boost_info debugfs because it not
> the same on every kernel. Removed function waiting for boost.
> Instead of that I made sure we will reach in boost by setting MAX freq to
> fmid.
> 
> v4: Moved proposal with making test drm master to other patch
> 
> v5: Used igt_force_gpu_reset() to reset GPU. Modified "reset" testcase.
> 
> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Jeff Mcgee <jeff.mcgee at intel.com>
> Cc: Petri Latvala <petri.latvala at intel.com>
> Cc: Jani Saarinen <jani.saarinen at intel.com>
> Cc: Radoslaw Szwichtenberg <radoslaw.szwichtenberg at intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Katarzyna Dec <katarzyna.dec at intel.com>
> ---
>  tests/pm_rps.c | 63 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
> ---
>  1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/pm_rps.c b/tests/pm_rps.c
> index f0455e78..a6c6f1eb 100644
> --- a/tests/pm_rps.c
> +++ b/tests/pm_rps.c
> @@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ enum {
>  	RP0,
>  	RP1,
>  	RPn,
> +	BOOST,
>  	NUMFREQ
>  };
>  
> @@ -60,7 +61,7 @@ struct junk {
>  	const char *mode;
>  	FILE *filp;
>  } stuff[] = {
> -	{ "cur", "r", NULL }, { "min", "rb+", NULL }, { "max", "rb+", NULL },
> { "RP0", "r", NULL }, { "RP1", "r", NULL }, { "RPn", "r", NULL }, { NULL,
> NULL, NULL }
> +	{ "cur", "r", NULL }, { "min", "rb+", NULL }, { "max", "rb+", NULL },
> { "RP0", "r", NULL }, { "RP1", "r", NULL }, { "RPn", "r", NULL }, { "boost",
> "rb+", NULL }, { NULL, NULL, NULL }
>  };
>  
>  static int readval(FILE *filp)
> @@ -167,7 +168,7 @@ static void dump(const int *freqs)
>  }
>  
>  enum load {
> -	LOW,
> +	LOW = 0,
>  	HIGH
>  };
>  
> @@ -185,9 +186,10 @@ static struct load_helper {
>  
>  static void load_helper_signal_handler(int sig)
>  {
> -	if (sig == SIGUSR2)
> -		lh.load = lh.load == LOW ? HIGH : LOW;
> -	else
> +	if (sig == SIGUSR2) {
> +		lh.load = !lh.load;
> +		igt_debug("Switching background load to %s\n", lh.load ?
> "high" : "low");
> +	} else
>  		lh.exit = true;
>  }
>  
> @@ -238,6 +240,7 @@ static void load_helper_run(enum load load)
>  		return;
>  	}
>  
> +	lh.exit = false;
>  	lh.load = load;
>  
>  	igt_fork_helper(&lh.igt_proc) {
> @@ -263,6 +266,8 @@ static void load_helper_run(enum load load)
>  		if (intel_gen(lh.devid) >= 6)
>  			execbuf.flags = I915_EXEC_BLT;
>  
> +		igt_debug("Applying %s load...\n", lh.load ? "high" : "low");
> +
>  		while (!lh.exit) {
>  			memset(&object, 0, sizeof(object));
>  			object.handle = fences[val%3];
> @@ -296,6 +301,8 @@ static void load_helper_run(enum load load)
>  		gem_close(drm_fd, fences[0]);
>  		gem_close(drm_fd, fences[1]);
>  		gem_close(drm_fd, fences[2]);
> +
> +		igt_drop_caches_set(drm_fd, DROP_RETIRE);
>  	}
>  }
>  
> @@ -553,38 +560,43 @@ static void stabilize_check(int *out)
>  	igt_debug("Waited %d msec to stabilize cur\n", wait);
>  }
>  
> -static void reset_gpu(void)
> -{
> -	int fd = drm_open_driver(DRIVER_INTEL);
> -	igt_post_hang_ring(fd, igt_hang_ring(fd, I915_EXEC_DEFAULT));
> -	close(fd);
> -}
> -
>  static void boost_freq(int fd, int *boost_freqs)
>  {
>  	int64_t timeout = 1;
> -	int ring = -1;
>  	igt_spin_t *load;
> +	unsigned int engine;
> +	int fmid = (origfreqs[RPn] + origfreqs[RP0]) / 2;
>  
> -	load = igt_spin_batch_new(fd, ring, 0);
> +	fmid = get_hw_rounded_freq(fmid);
> +	//set max freq to less then boost freq
Looks good to me.
Just one very minor comment - we do use two different comment styles, should we
instead use one? Do you think we should add any simple test descriptions above
the tests or these tests are easy to understand?
> +	writeval(stuff[MAX].filp, fmid);
>  
> +	/* put boost on the same engine as low load */
> +	engine = I915_EXEC_RENDER;

Otherwise
Reviewed-by: Radoslaw Szwichtenberg <radoslaw.szwichtenberg at intel.com