[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] i915/gem_engine_topology: Introduce and use gem_context_clone_with_engines

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2020-01-23 14:01:41)
> 
> On 23/01/2020 13:16, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2020-01-23 13:08:26)
> >>
> >> On 23/01/2020 12:54, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >>> Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2020-01-23 12:43:06)
> >>>> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
> >>>>
> >>>> In test cases which create new contexts and submit work against them using
> >>>> the passed in engine index we are sometimes unsure whether this engine
> >>>> index was potentially created based on a default context with engine map
> >>>> configured (such as when under the __for_each_physical_engine iterator.
> >>>>
> >>>> To simplify test code we add gem_context/queue_clone_with_engines which
> >>>> is to be used in such scenario instead of the current pattern of
> >>>> gem_context_create followed by gem_context_set_all_engines (which is also
> >>>> removed by the patch).
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
> >>>> Suggested-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>    lib/i915/gem_context.c         | 59 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>    lib/i915/gem_context.h         |  4 +++
> >>>>    lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.c | 11 -------
> >>>>    lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.h |  2 --
> >>>>    tests/i915/gem_ctx_clone.c     | 15 +--------
> >>>>    tests/i915/gem_ctx_switch.c    | 19 ++++-------
> >>>>    tests/i915/gem_exec_parallel.c |  3 +-
> >>>>    tests/i915/gem_spin_batch.c    | 11 +++----
> >>>>    tests/perf_pmu.c               |  3 +-
> >>>>    9 files changed, 76 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/lib/i915/gem_context.c b/lib/i915/gem_context.c
> >>>> index 1fae5191f83f..f92d5ff3dfc5 100644
> >>>> --- a/lib/i915/gem_context.c
> >>>> +++ b/lib/i915/gem_context.c
> >>>> @@ -372,6 +372,50 @@ uint32_t gem_context_clone(int i915,
> >>>>           return ctx;
> >>>>    }
> >>>>    
> >>>> +bool gem_has_context_clone(int i915)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> +       struct drm_i915_gem_context_create_ext_clone ext = {
> >>>> +               { .name = I915_CONTEXT_CREATE_EXT_CLONE },
> >>>> +               .clone_id = -1,
> >>>> +       };
> >>>> +       struct drm_i915_gem_context_create_ext create = {
> >>>> +               .flags = I915_CONTEXT_CREATE_FLAGS_USE_EXTENSIONS,
> >>>> +               .extensions = to_user_pointer(&ext),
> >>>> +       };
> >>>> +       int err;
> >>>> +
> >>>> +       err = 0;
> >>>> +       if (igt_ioctl(i915, DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_CONTEXT_CREATE_EXT, &create)) {
> >>>> +               err = -errno;
> >>>> +               igt_assume(err);
> >>>> +       }
> >>>> +       errno = 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> +       return err == -ENOENT;
> >>>> +}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +/**
> >>>> + * gem_context_clone_with_engines:
> >>>> + * @i915: open i915 drm file descriptor
> >>>> + * @src: i915 context id
> >>>> + *
> >>>> + * Special purpose wrapper to create a new context by cloning engines from @src.
> >>>> + *
> >>>> + * In can be called regardless of whether the kernel supports context cloning.
> >>>> + *
> >>>> + * Intended purpose is to use for creating contexts against which work will be
> >>>> + * submitted and the engine index came from external source, derived from a
> >>>> + * default context potentially configured with an engine map.
> >>>> + */
> >>>> +uint32_t gem_context_clone_with_engines(int i915, uint32_t src)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> +       if (!gem_has_context_clone(i915))
> >>>> +               return gem_context_create(i915);
> >>>
> >>> Yes, that should cover us for older kernels and keep the for_each loops
> >>> happy.
> >>>
> >>>> +       else
> >>>> +               return gem_context_clone(i915, src, 0,
> >>>> +                                        I915_CONTEXT_CLONE_ENGINES);
> >>>
> >>> 0 and CLONE are the wrong way around.
> >>
> >> Oopsie.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I would have done
> >>>
> >>> int __gem_context_clone_with_engines(int i915, uint32_t src, uint32_t *out)
> >>> {
> >>>        int err;
> >>>
> >>>        err = __gem_context_clone(i915, src, CLONE_ENGINES, 0, out);
> >>>        if (err && !gem_has_context_clone(i915))
> >>>                err = __gem_context_create(i915, out);
> >>>
> >>>        return err;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> uint32_t gem_context_clone_with_engines(int i915, uint32_t src)
> >>> {
> >>>        uint32_t ctx;
> >>>
> >>>        igt_assert_eq(__gem_context_clone_with_engine(i915, src, &ctx), 0);
> >>>
> >>>        return ctx;
> >>> }
> >>
> >> I think I prefer my version as it is a bit more explicit.
> > 
> > I was hoping to do something more like
> >       err = __clone()
> >       if (err == ENOSYS)
> >               err = __create()
> > 
> > Either way, I would suggest doing
> > 
> > int __gem_context_clone_with_engines(int i915, uint32_t src, uint32_t *out);
> > uint32_t gem_context_clone_with_engines(int i915, uint32_t src);
> > 
> > as I prefer that style of error message.
> 
> Error message? What do you mean?

igt_assert_eq(__gem_context_clone_with_engine(i915, src, &ctx), 0);
is the nicest assert message without using igt_assert_f and writing an
information message by hand.

> > Nothing else to complain about,
> > Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> 
> So this is conditional on rewriting it as above or not?

Mere recommendations. Knowing full well that if at some point we need
__gem_context_clone_with_engines() the above will happen anyway :)
-Chris