[Intel-gfx] [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v2 1/1] tests/gem_ctx_exec: Exercise barrier race

[Janusz Krzysztofik]

Hi Umesh,

On Friday, 10 February 2023 18:24:53 CET Umesh Nerlige Ramappa wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 09:20:25AM -0800, Umesh Nerlige Ramappa wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 12:50:39PM +0100, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> >>Users reported oopses on list corruptions when using i915 perf with a
> >>number of concurrently running graphics applications.  That indicates we
> >>are currently missing some important tests for such scenarios.  Cover
> >>that gap.
> >>
> >>Since root cause analysis pointed out to an issue in barrier processing
> >>code, add a new subtest focused on exercising interaction between perf
> >>open / close operations, which replace active barriers with perf requests
> >>on kernel contexts, and concurrent barrier preallocate / acquire
> >>operations performed during context first pin / last unpin.
> >>
> >>v2: convert to a separate subtest, not a variant of another one (that has
> >>   been dropped from the series),
> >> - move the subtest out of tests/i915/perf.c (Ashutosh), add it to
> >>   tests/i915/gem_ctx_exec.c,
> >> - don't touch lib/i915/perf.c (Umesh, Ashutosh), duplicate reused code
> >>   from tests/i915/perf.c in tests/i915/gem_ctx_exec.c.
> >>
> >>References: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/6333
> >>Signed-off-by: Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzysztofik at linux.intel.com>
> >>---
> >>tests/i915/gem_ctx_exec.c | 123 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>tests/meson.build         |   9 ++-
> >>2 files changed, 131 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_ctx_exec.c b/tests/i915/gem_ctx_exec.c
> >>index 3d94f01db9..97fbc50e97 100644
> >>--- a/tests/i915/gem_ctx_exec.c
> >>+++ b/tests/i915/gem_ctx_exec.c
> >>@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@
> >>
> >>#include "i915/gem.h"
> >>#include "i915/gem_create.h"
> >>+#include "i915/perf.h"
> >>#include "igt.h"
> >>#include "igt_dummyload.h"
> >>#include "igt_rand.h"
> >>@@ -448,6 +449,115 @@ static void close_race(int i915)
> >>	munmap(ctx_id, 4096);
> >>}
> >>
> >>+static uint64_t timebase_scale(struct intel_perf *intel_perf, uint32_t u32_delta)
> >>+{
> >>+	return ((uint64_t)u32_delta * NSEC_PER_SEC) / intel_perf->devinfo.timestamp_frequency;
> >>+}
> >>+
> >>+/* Returns: the largest OA exponent that will still result in a sampling period
> >>+ * less than or equal to the given @period.
> >>+ */
> >>+static int max_oa_exponent_for_period_lte(struct intel_perf *intel_perf, uint64_t period)
> >>+{
> >>+	/* NB: timebase_scale() takes a uint32_t and an exponent of 30
> >>+	 * would already represent a period of ~3 minutes so there's
> >>+	 * really no need to consider higher exponents.
> >>+	 */
> >>+	for (int i = 0; i < 30; i++) {
> >>+		uint64_t oa_period = timebase_scale(intel_perf, 2 << i);
> >>+
> >>+		if (oa_period > period)
> >>+			return max(0, i - 1);
> >>+	}
> >>+
> >>+	igt_assert(!"reached");
> >>+	return -1;
> >>+}
> >>+
> >>+static void perf_open_close_loop(int fd, int *done)
> >>+{
> >>+	struct intel_perf_metric_set *metric_set = NULL, *metric_set_iter;
> >>+	struct intel_perf *intel_perf = intel_perf_for_fd(fd);
> >>+	uint64_t properties[] = {
> >>+		DRM_I915_PERF_PROP_SAMPLE_OA, true,
> >>+		DRM_I915_PERF_PROP_OA_METRICS_SET, 0,
> >>+		DRM_I915_PERF_PROP_OA_FORMAT, 0,
> >>+		DRM_I915_PERF_PROP_OA_EXPONENT, 0,
> >>+	};
> >>+	struct drm_i915_perf_open_param param = {
> >>+		.flags = I915_PERF_FLAG_FD_CLOEXEC,
> >
> >nit: If you also add I915_PERF_FLAG_DISABLED here, then OA buffer 
> >reports will be disabled. This will make sure that the perf API does 
> >not enable the OA unit. It will still run the code that you are 
> >targeting.

OK

> >
> >>+		.num_properties = sizeof(properties) / 16,
> >>+		.properties_ptr = to_user_pointer(properties),
> >>+	};
> >>+	uint32_t devid = intel_get_drm_devid(fd);
> >>+
> >>+	igt_require(intel_perf);
> >>+	intel_perf_load_perf_configs(intel_perf, fd);
> >>+
> >>+	igt_require(devid);
> >>+	igt_list_for_each_entry(metric_set_iter, &intel_perf->metric_sets, link) {
> >>+		if (!strcmp(metric_set_iter->symbol_name,
> >>+			    IS_HASWELL(devid) ? "RenderBasic" : "TestOa")) {
> >>+			metric_set = metric_set_iter;
> >>+			break;
> >>+		}
> >>+	}
> >>+	igt_require(metric_set);
> >>+	igt_require(metric_set->perf_oa_metrics_set);
> >>+	properties[3] = metric_set->perf_oa_metrics_set;
> >>+	properties[5] = metric_set->perf_oa_format;
> >>+
> >>+	igt_require(intel_perf->devinfo.timestamp_frequency);
> >>+	properties[7] = max_oa_exponent_for_period_lte(intel_perf, 1000);
> >
> >nit: The result of max_oa_exponent_for_period_lte() can be hard coded 
> >here (likely 1 << 5) and you could remove the additional code added 
> >for max_oa_exponent_for_period_lte(). This parameter only controls the 
> >frequency at which the OA reports are captured into the OA buffer and 
> >it has no relation to the barrier related code in perf.
> 
> My bad. The value would likely be 5. Anyways, it's just a nit.

Thanks for your constructive comments, I'll follow your suggestions.

Thanks,
Janusz

> 
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Umesh
> >
> >>+
> >>+	intel_perf_free(intel_perf);
> >...
>