[Intel-gfx] [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v2 2/2] tests/gem_eio: Add reset and unwedge stress testing

[Antonio Argenziano]

On 03/04/18 11:24, Antonio Argenziano wrote:
> 
> 
> On 03/04/18 04:36, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>>
>> Reset and unwedge stress testing is supposed to trigger wedging or resets
>> at incovenient times and then re-use the context so either the context or
>> driver tracking might get confused and break.
>>
>> v2:
>>   * Renamed for more sensible naming.
>>   * Added some comments to explain what the test is doing. (Chris Wilson)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
>> ---
>>   tests/gem_eio.c | 74 
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 74 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/gem_eio.c b/tests/gem_eio.c
>> index b7c5047f0816..9599e73db736 100644
>> --- a/tests/gem_eio.c
>> +++ b/tests/gem_eio.c
>> @@ -591,6 +591,74 @@ static void test_inflight_internal(int fd, 
>> unsigned int wait)
>>       close(fd);
>>   }
>> +/*
>> + * Verify that we can submit and execute work after unwedging the GPU.
>> + */
>> +static void test_reset_stress(int fd, unsigned int flags)
>> +{
>> +    uint32_t ctx0 = gem_context_create(fd);
>> +
>> +    igt_until_timeout(5) {
>> +        struct drm_i915_gem_execbuffer2 execbuf = { };
>> +        struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 obj = { };
>> +        uint32_t bbe = MI_BATCH_BUFFER_END;
>> +        igt_spin_t *hang;
>> +        unsigned int i;
>> +        uint32_t ctx;
>> +
>> +        gem_quiescent_gpu(fd);
>> +
>> +        igt_require(i915_reset_control(flags & TEST_WEDGE ?
>> +                           false : true));
>> +
>> +        ctx = context_create_safe(fd);
>> +
>> +        /*
>> +         * Start executing a spin batch with some queued batches
>> +         * against a different context after it.
>> +         */
> 
> Aren't all batches queued on ctx0? Or is this a reference to the check 
> on ctx you have later in the test.
> 
> Thanks,
> Antonio
> 
>> +        hang = spin_sync(fd, ctx0, 0);

I think you meant to send this^ on ctx.

Antonio.

>> +
>> +        obj.handle = gem_create(fd, 4096);
>> +        gem_write(fd, obj.handle, 0, &bbe, sizeof(bbe));
>> +
>> +        execbuf.buffers_ptr = to_user_pointer(&obj);
>> +        execbuf.buffer_count = 1;
>> +        execbuf.rsvd1 = ctx0;
>> +
>> +        for (i = 0; i < 10; i++)
>> +            gem_execbuf(fd, &execbuf);
>> +
>> +        /* Wedge after a small delay. */
>> +        igt_assert_eq(__check_wait(fd, obj.handle, 100e3), 0);
>> +
>> +        /* Unwedge by forcing a reset. */
>> +        igt_assert(i915_reset_control(true));
>> +        trigger_reset(fd);
>> +
>> +        gem_quiescent_gpu(fd);
>> +
>> +        /*
>> +         * Verify that we are able to submit work after unwedging from
>> +         * both contexts.
>> +         */
>> +        execbuf.rsvd1 = ctx;
>> +        for (i = 0; i < 5; i++)
>> +            gem_execbuf(fd, &execbuf);
>> +
>> +        execbuf.rsvd1 = ctx0;
>> +        for (i = 0; i < 5; i++)
>> +            gem_execbuf(fd, &execbuf);
>> +
>> +        gem_sync(fd, obj.handle);
>> +        igt_spin_batch_free(fd, hang);
>> +        gem_context_destroy(fd, ctx);
>> +        gem_close(fd, obj.handle);
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    gem_context_destroy(fd, ctx0);
>> +}
>> +
>>   static int fd = -1;
>>   static void
>> @@ -635,6 +703,12 @@ igt_main
>>       igt_subtest("in-flight-suspend")
>>           test_inflight_suspend(fd);
>> +    igt_subtest("reset-stress")
>> +        test_reset_stress(fd, 0);
>> +
>> +    igt_subtest("unwedge-stress")
>> +        test_reset_stress(fd, TEST_WEDGE);
>> +
>>       igt_subtest_group {
>>           const struct {
>>               unsigned int wait;
>>
> _______________________________________________
> igt-dev mailing list
> igt-dev at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev