[Intel-gfx] [igt-dev] [PATCH v2 i-g-t] i915_pm_freq_api: Add some debug to tests
Belgaumkar, Vinay
vinay.belgaumkar at intel.com
Tue Jul 18 04:19:13 UTC 2023
On 7/17/2023 6:50 PM, Dixit, Ashutosh wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2023 11:42:13 -0700, Vinay Belgaumkar wrote:
>> Some subtests seem to be failing in CI, use igt_assert_(lt/eq) which
>> print the values being compared and some additional debug as well.
>>
>> v2: Print GT as well (Ashutosh)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vinay Belgaumkar <vinay.belgaumkar at intel.com>
>> ---
>> tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c | 18 ++++++++----------
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c b/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
>> index 522abee35..a7bbd4896 100644
>> --- a/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
>> +++ b/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
>> @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ static void test_freq_basic_api(int dirfd, int gt)
>> rpn = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RPn_FREQ_MHZ);
>> rp0 = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RP0_FREQ_MHZ);
>> rpe = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RP1_FREQ_MHZ);
>> + igt_debug("GT: %d, RPn: %d, RPe: %d, RP0: %d", gt, rpn, rpe, rp0);
>>
>> /*
>> * Negative bound tests
>> @@ -90,21 +91,18 @@ static void test_reset(int i915, int dirfd, int gt, int count)
>> int fd;
>>
>> for (int i = 0; i < count; i++) {
>> - igt_assert_f(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0,
>> - "Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
>> - igt_assert_f(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0,
>> - "Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
>> + igt_debug("Running cycle: %d", i);
>> + igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
>> + igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
> I am R-b'ing this but stuff like this should be using igt_assert_lt()
> according to the commit message?
>
> This _lt stuff has to be fixed all over the file, not just this patch, if
> it brings any value (again according to the commit message).
>
> Let me know if you want to fix this now or in a later patch. I'll wait
> before merging.
Yup, I will send out another version with the corrected commit message.
Thanks,
Vinay.
>
> Reviewed-by: Ashutosh Dixit <ashutosh.dixit at intel.com>
>
>> usleep(ACT_FREQ_LATENCY_US);
>> - igt_assert_f(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn,
>> - "Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
>> + igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
>>
>> /* Manually trigger a GT reset */
>> fd = igt_debugfs_gt_open(i915, gt, "reset", O_WRONLY);
>> igt_require(fd >= 0);
>> igt_ignore_warn(write(fd, "1\n", 2));
>>
>> - igt_assert_f(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn,
>> - "Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
>> + igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
>> }
>> close(fd);
>> }
>> @@ -116,13 +114,13 @@ static void test_suspend(int i915, int dirfd, int gt)
>> igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
>> igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
>> usleep(ACT_FREQ_LATENCY_US);
>> - igt_assert(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn);
>> + igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
>>
>> /* Manually trigger a suspend */
>> igt_system_suspend_autoresume(SUSPEND_STATE_S3,
>> SUSPEND_TEST_NONE);
>>
>> - igt_assert(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn);
>> + igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
>> }
>>
>> int i915 = -1;
>> --
>> 2.38.1
>>
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list