[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] i915/gem_exec_flush: Forgo I915_EXEC_NORELOC

[Chris Wilson]

As we do not maintain the contents of the batch buffers as we reuse and
may move the objects between cycles, the requirements for
I915_EXEC_NORELOC are not met. Rely on natural reloc skipping instead,
so long as the ioctl overhead is less than the GPU, it should not have
any impact on the incoherency detection rates.

Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/1203
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
---
 tests/i915/gem_exec_flush.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_exec_flush.c b/tests/i915/gem_exec_flush.c
index 9b6f2ed19..513cde364 100644
--- a/tests/i915/gem_exec_flush.c
+++ b/tests/i915/gem_exec_flush.c
@@ -163,7 +163,7 @@ static void run(int fd, unsigned ring, int nchild, int timeout,
 		memset(&execbuf, 0, sizeof(execbuf));
 		execbuf.buffers_ptr = to_user_pointer(obj);
 		execbuf.buffer_count = 3;
-		execbuf.flags = ring | (1 << 11) | (1<<12);
+		execbuf.flags = ring | (1 << 12);
 		if (gen < 6)
 			execbuf.flags |= I915_EXEC_SECURE;
 
@@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ static void run(int fd, unsigned ring, int nchild, int timeout,
 			i = 16 * (idx % 64) + (idx / 64);
 			obj[1].relocs_ptr = to_user_pointer(&reloc0[i]);
 			obj[2].relocs_ptr = to_user_pointer(&reloc1[i]);
-			execbuf.batch_start_offset =  64*i;
+			execbuf.batch_start_offset = 64 * i;
 
 overwrite:
 			if ((flags & BEFORE) &&
@@ -396,7 +396,7 @@ static void batch(int fd, unsigned ring, int nchild, int timeout,
 		memset(&execbuf, 0, sizeof(execbuf));
 		execbuf.buffers_ptr = to_user_pointer(obj);
 		execbuf.buffer_count = 2;
-		execbuf.flags = ring | (1 << 11) | (1<<12);
+		execbuf.flags = ring | (1 << 12);
 		if (gen < 6)
 			execbuf.flags |= I915_EXEC_SECURE;
 
-- 
2.25.0