Re: [PATCH] tests/gem_fenced_exec_thrash: Test with > max fences

From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
To: ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tests/gem_fenced_exec_thrash: Test with > max fences
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 20:22:23 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130411182223.GQ27612@phenom.ffwll.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1365702220-20155-1-git-send-email-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>

On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 08:43:40PM +0300, ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com wrote:
> From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
> 
> Make sure the kernel returns EDEADLK when the number of fences is
> exceeded for gen2-3. For gen4+ the test makes sure the kernel ignores
> the EXEC_OBJECT_NEEDS_FENCE flag.
> 
> Note that I changed the code not to round the num_fences to an even
> number. Not sure why that was there, and if there's a reason for it,
> we need to add it back.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>

Looks nice, merged.
-Daniel

> ---
>  tests/gem_fenced_exec_thrash.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/gem_fenced_exec_thrash.c b/tests/gem_fenced_exec_thrash.c
> index ca88c53..c8a2c58 100644
> --- a/tests/gem_fenced_exec_thrash.c
> +++ b/tests/gem_fenced_exec_thrash.c
> @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@
>  #include <i915_drm.h>
>  
>  #include "drmtest.h"
> +#include "intel_gpu_tools.h"
>  
>  #define WIDTH 1024
>  #define HEIGHT 1024
> @@ -47,8 +48,6 @@
>  
>  #define MAX_FENCES 32
>  
> -#define MI_BATCH_BUFFER_END	(0xA<<23)
> -
>  /*
>   * Testcase: execbuf fence accounting
>   *
> @@ -95,7 +94,7 @@ static int get_num_fences(int fd)
>  	printf ("total %d fences\n", val);
>  	assert(val > 4);
>  
> -	return val - 2;
> +	return val;
>  }
>  
>  static void fill_reloc(struct drm_i915_gem_relocation_entry *reloc, uint32_t handle)
> @@ -106,23 +105,19 @@ static void fill_reloc(struct drm_i915_gem_relocation_entry *reloc, uint32_t han
>  	reloc->write_domain = 0;
>  }
>  
> -int
> -main(int argc, char **argv)
> +static void run_test(int fd, int num_fences, int expected_errno)
>  {
>  	struct drm_i915_gem_execbuffer2 execbuf[2];
> -	struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 exec[2][2*MAX_FENCES+1];
> -	struct drm_i915_gem_relocation_entry reloc[2*MAX_FENCES];
> +	struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 exec[2][2*MAX_FENCES+3];
> +	struct drm_i915_gem_relocation_entry reloc[2*MAX_FENCES+2];
>  
> -	int fd = drm_open_any();
> -	int i, n, num_fences;
> +	int i, n;
>  	int loop = 1000;
>  
>  	memset(execbuf, 0, sizeof(execbuf));
>  	memset(exec, 0, sizeof(exec));
>  	memset(reloc, 0, sizeof(reloc));
>  
> -	num_fences = get_num_fences(fd) & ~1;
> -	assert(num_fences <= MAX_FENCES);
>  	for (n = 0; n < 2*num_fences; n++) {
>  		uint32_t handle = tiled_bo_create(fd);
>  		exec[1][2*num_fences - n-1].handle = exec[0][n].handle = handle;
> @@ -148,13 +143,30 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
>  		ret = drmIoctl(fd,
>  			       DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_EXECBUFFER2,
>  			       &execbuf[0]);
> -		assert(ret == 0);
> +		assert(expected_errno ?
> +		       ret < 0 && errno == expected_errno :
> +		       ret == 0);
>  
>  		ret = drmIoctl(fd,
>  			       DRM_IOCTL_I915_GEM_EXECBUFFER2,
>  			       &execbuf[1]);
> -		assert(ret == 0);
> +		assert(expected_errno ?
> +		       ret < 0 && errno == expected_errno :
> +		       ret == 0);
>  	} while (--loop);
> +}
> +
> +int
> +main(int argc, char **argv)
> +{
> +	int fd = drm_open_any();
> +	int num_fences = get_num_fences(fd);
> +	uint32_t devid = intel_get_drm_devid(fd);
> +
> +	assert(num_fences <= MAX_FENCES);
> +
> +	run_test(fd, num_fences - 2, 0);
> +	run_test(fd, num_fences + 1, intel_gen(devid) >= 4 ? 0 : EDEADLK);
>  
>  	close(fd);
>  
> -- 
> 1.8.1.5
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch