[Intel-gfx] [RFC i-g-t 3/5] lib/igt_device_scan: Remember PCI card index after scanning
Tvrtko Ursulin
tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com
Mon Nov 16 17:07:36 UTC 2020
On 16/11/2020 16:47, Zbigniew Kempczyński wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 03:09:43PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> <cut>
>
>>>> +
>>>> /* Core scanning function.
>>>> *
>>>> * All scanned devices are kept inside igt_devs.all pointer array.
>>>> @@ -657,6 +685,7 @@ static void scan_drm_devices(void)
>>>> udev_unref(udev);
>>>> sort_all_devices();
>>>> + index_pci_devices();
>>>> igt_list_for_each_entry(dev, &igt_devs.all, link) {
>>>> struct igt_device *dev_dup = duplicate_device(dev);
>>>> @@ -1105,13 +1134,13 @@ static struct igt_list_head *filter_pci(const struct filter_class *fcls,
>>>> if (filter->data.device && strcasecmp(filter->data.device, dev->device))
>>>> continue;
>>>> - /* We get n-th card */
>>>> - if (!card) {
>>>> - struct igt_device *dup = duplicate_device(dev);
>>>> - igt_list_add_tail(&dup->link, &igt_devs.filtered);
>>>> - break;
>>>> - }
>>>> - card--;
>>>> + /* Skip if 'card' doesn't match */
>>>> + if (card != dev->pci_index)
>>>> + continue;
>>>> +
>>>> + dev = duplicate_device(dev);
>>>> + igt_list_add_tail(&dev->link, &igt_devs.filtered);
>>>> + break;
>>>
>>> I may wrong (I got no such testing env) but devs_compare() function along with
>>> index_pci_devices() can lead us to such (example) situation:
>>>
>>> igt_devs.all contains devices with syspaths and subsystem pci:
>>> /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:04.0 -> vendor 8086, device 1234 pci_index == 0
>>> /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:05.0 -> vendor 8086, device 4321 pci_index == 1
>>> /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:06.0 -> vendor 8086, device 1234 pci_index == 2
>>>
>>> If would try filter: pci=vendor=8086,device=1234,card=1 I would expect
>>> to select (second card [index == 1]) from filtered devices which match
>>> device 1234.
>>
>> It is supposed to be like you say, each pci_index being in the namespace of
>> equal vendor & device only.
>>
>> Like from a dual GPU system:
>>
>> $ tools/lsgpu --pci
>> card1 8086:4905 pci:vendor=8086,device=4905,card=0
>> └─renderD129
>> card0 8086:3E98 pci:vendor=8086,device=3E98,card=0
>> └─renderD128
>>
>> Or two identical GPUs (mocked by manual addition of an almost duplicate
>> entry to list of scanned devices:
>>
>> $ tools/lsgpu --pci
>> card0 8086:193B pci:vendor=8086,device=193B,card=0
>> ├─renderD128
>> └─renderD128
>> card0x 8086:193B pci:vendor=8086,device=193B,card=1
>> ├─renderD128
>> └─renderD128
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tvrtko
>
> I made a mistake in above listing, it should be:
> /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:04.0 -> vendor 8086, device 1234 pci_index == 0
> /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:05.0 -> vendor 8086, device 4321 pci_index == 0
> /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:06.0 -> vendor 8086, device 1234 pci_index == 1
>
> What if I would go over all Intel cards using pci filter:
>
> pci:vendor=8086,card=N where n is 0... until there's no Intel pci device.
>
> This way we loose possibility to iterate over all pci devices imo.
Oh I get it know, I misunderstood how this all works. So the card
argument to the pci filter is nothing about the actual PCI card, but
just "match number" - match with this filter and return card=N Nth match.
So I should leave the code in filter_pci as is.
Will my new filters work like that. I think so. Ok, will update.
Regards,
Tvrtko
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list