[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] i915/gem_mmap_gtt: Run forked mmap tests on tgl

[Martin Peres]

On 17/09/2019 14:23, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Tigerlake does not seem to be suffering from the same fault as Icelake
> did, so let the tests run as they should complete within the timeout.
> 
> Early tgl results:
> 
> basic-small-copy: SUCCESS (1,671s)
> forked-basic-small-copy: SUCCESS (37,568s)
> 
> medium-copy: SUCCESS (3,307s)
> forked-medium-copy: SUCCESS (76,614s)
> forked-medium-copy-XY: SUCCESS (203,251s)
> forked-medium-copy-odd: SUCCESS (204,265s)

Thanks for checking this out!

3 minutes for a subtest is still an eternity... How much lost coverage
would it be if we did not execute the non-small forked test?

Martin

> 
> Not great, but nowhere near as bad as icl,
>        single      forked
> glk:    2.15s       2.89s
> icl:    2.50s     281.08s
> 
> References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110882
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala at linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Martin Peres <martin.peres at linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  tests/i915/gem_mmap_gtt.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_mmap_gtt.c b/tests/i915/gem_mmap_gtt.c
> index ac439cdf8..e2c6ad9a0 100644
> --- a/tests/i915/gem_mmap_gtt.c
> +++ b/tests/i915/gem_mmap_gtt.c
> @@ -792,7 +792,7 @@ test_huge_copy(int fd, int huge, int tiling_a, int tiling_b, int ncpus)
>  	uint64_t huge_object_size, i;
>  	unsigned mode = CHECK_RAM;
>  
> -	igt_fail_on_f(intel_gen(devid) >= 11 && ncpus > 1,
> +	igt_fail_on_f(intel_gen(devid) == 11 && ncpus > 1,
>  		      "Please adjust your expectations, https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110882\n");
>  
>  	switch (huge) {
>