[Intel-gfx] [RFC PATCH i-g-t v4 1/4] tests/gem_exec_reloc: Don't filter out invalid addresses
Vanshidhar Konda
vanshidhar.r.konda at intel.com
Thu Oct 31 16:59:50 UTC 2019
May be this patch can just be merged with the other patch in this series
that changes gem_exec_reloc.
Vanshi
On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 04:28:54PM +0100, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
>Commit a355b2d6eb42 ("igt/gem_exec_reloc: Filter out unavailable
>addresses for !ppgtt") introduced filtering of addresses possibly
>occupied by other users of shared GTT. Unfortunately, that filtering
>doesn't distinguish between actually occupied addresses and otherwise
>invalid softpin offsets. As soon as incorrect GTT alignment is assumed
>when running on future backends with possibly larger minimum page
>sizes, a half of calculated offsets to be tested will be incorrectly
>detected as occupied by other users and silently skipped instead of
>reported as a problem. That will significantly distort the intended
>test pattern.
>
>Filter out failing addresses only if not reported as invalid.
>
>v2: Skip unavailable addresses only when not running on full PPGTT.
>v3: Replace the not on full PPGTT requirement for skipping with error
> code checking.
>
>Signed-off-by: Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzysztofik at linux.intel.com>
>Cc: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
>---
> tests/i915/gem_exec_reloc.c | 12 +++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_exec_reloc.c b/tests/i915/gem_exec_reloc.c
>index 5f59fe99..423fed8b 100644
>--- a/tests/i915/gem_exec_reloc.c
>+++ b/tests/i915/gem_exec_reloc.c
>@@ -520,7 +520,7 @@ static void basic_range(int fd, unsigned flags)
> uint64_t gtt_size = gem_aperture_size(fd);
> const uint32_t bbe = MI_BATCH_BUFFER_END;
> igt_spin_t *spin = NULL;
>- int count, n;
>+ int count, n, err;
>
> igt_require(gem_has_softpin(fd));
>
>@@ -542,8 +542,11 @@ static void basic_range(int fd, unsigned flags)
> gem_write(fd, obj[n].handle, 0, &bbe, sizeof(bbe));
> execbuf.buffers_ptr = to_user_pointer(&obj[n]);
> execbuf.buffer_count = 1;
>- if (__gem_execbuf(fd, &execbuf))
>+ err = __gem_execbuf(fd, &execbuf);
>+ if (err) {
>+ igt_assert(err != -EINVAL);
> continue;
>+ }
>
> igt_debug("obj[%d] handle=%d, address=%llx\n",
> n, obj[n].handle, (long long)obj[n].offset);
>@@ -562,8 +565,11 @@ static void basic_range(int fd, unsigned flags)
> gem_write(fd, obj[n].handle, 0, &bbe, sizeof(bbe));
> execbuf.buffers_ptr = to_user_pointer(&obj[n]);
> execbuf.buffer_count = 1;
>- if (__gem_execbuf(fd, &execbuf))
>+ err = __gem_execbuf(fd, &execbuf);
>+ if (err) {
>+ igt_assert(err != -EINVAL);
> continue;
>+ }
>
> igt_debug("obj[%d] handle=%d, address=%llx\n",
> n, obj[n].handle, (long long)obj[n].offset);
>--
>2.21.0
>
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list