[PATCH i-g-t] igt/gem_exec_await: Tag the final batch in the GTT

[PATCH i-g-t] igt/gem_exec_await: Tag the final batch in the GTT

[Chris Wilson]

Batches are contained in their position within the GTT by the kernel,
and if they are in an invalid poistion will be unbound and rebound
before execution. In our test setup, we therefore need to place the
batch into a valid poistion within the GTT before we fill the ring with
busyspinners.

Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
---
 tests/gem_exec_await.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tests/gem_exec_await.c b/tests/gem_exec_await.c
index b0d5c9045..5cfeb8ec8 100644
--- a/tests/gem_exec_await.c
+++ b/tests/gem_exec_await.c
@@ -135,6 +135,9 @@ static void wide(int fd, int ring_size, int timeout, unsigned int flags)
 	gem_write(fd, obj[nengine*ring_size].handle, 0, &bbe, sizeof(bbe));
 
 	memset(&execbuf, 0, sizeof(execbuf));
+	execbuf.buffers_ptr = to_user_pointer(&obj[nengine*ring_size]);
+	execbuf.buffer_count = 1;
+	gem_execbuf(fd, &execbuf); /* tag the object as a batch in the GTT */
 	execbuf.buffers_ptr = to_user_pointer(obj);
 	execbuf.buffer_count = nengine*ring_size + 1;
 
-- 
2.17.1

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] igt/gem_exec_await: Tag the final batch in the GTT

[Chris Wilson]

Batches are contained in their position within the GTT by the kernel,
and if they are in an invalid poistion will be unbound and rebound
before execution. In our test setup, we therefore need to place the
batch into a valid poistion within the GTT before we fill the ring with
busyspinners.

Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
---
 tests/gem_exec_await.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tests/gem_exec_await.c b/tests/gem_exec_await.c
index b0d5c9045..5cfeb8ec8 100644
--- a/tests/gem_exec_await.c
+++ b/tests/gem_exec_await.c
@@ -135,6 +135,9 @@ static void wide(int fd, int ring_size, int timeout, unsigned int flags)
 	gem_write(fd, obj[nengine*ring_size].handle, 0, &bbe, sizeof(bbe));
 
 	memset(&execbuf, 0, sizeof(execbuf));
+	execbuf.buffers_ptr = to_user_pointer(&obj[nengine*ring_size]);
+	execbuf.buffer_count = 1;
+	gem_execbuf(fd, &execbuf); /* tag the object as a batch in the GTT */
 	execbuf.buffers_ptr = to_user_pointer(obj);
 	execbuf.buffer_count = nengine*ring_size + 1;
 
-- 
2.17.1

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [PATCH i-g-t] igt/gem_exec_await: Tag the final batch in the GTT

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Chris Wilson (2018-06-07 16:27:22)
> Batches are contained in their position within the GTT by the kernel,
constrained

> and if they are in an invalid poistion will be unbound and rebound
position

> before execution. In our test setup, we therefore need to place the
> batch into a valid poistion within the GTT before we fill the ring with
> busyspinners.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] igt/gem_exec_await: Tag the final batch in the GTT

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Chris Wilson (2018-06-07 16:27:22)
> Batches are contained in their position within the GTT by the kernel,
constrained

> and if they are in an invalid poistion will be unbound and rebound
position

> before execution. In our test setup, we therefore need to place the
> batch into a valid poistion within the GTT before we fill the ring with
> busyspinners.
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev

[igt-dev] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for igt/gem_exec_await: Tag the final batch in the GTT

[Patchwork]

== Series Details ==

Series: igt/gem_exec_await: Tag the final batch in the GTT
URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/44415/
State : success

== Summary ==

= CI Bug Log - changes from CI_DRM_4289 -> IGTPW_1429 =

== Summary - WARNING ==

  Minor unknown changes coming with IGTPW_1429 need to be verified
  manually.
  
  If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
  introduced in IGTPW_1429, please notify your bug team to allow them
  to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.

  External URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/44415/revisions/1/mbox/

== Possible new issues ==

  Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in IGTPW_1429:

  === IGT changes ===

    ==== Warnings ====

    igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@read-crc-pipe-c:
      fi-glk-j4005:       SKIP -> PASS

    
== Known issues ==

  Here are the changes found in IGTPW_1429 that come from known issues:

  === IGT changes ===

    ==== Issues hit ====

    igt@drv_module_reload@basic-no-display:
      fi-glk-j4005:       PASS -> DMESG-WARN (fdo#106725)

    igt@gem_mmap_gtt@basic-small-bo-tiledx:
      fi-gdg-551:         PASS -> FAIL (fdo#102575)

    igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-dpms:
      fi-glk-j4005:       PASS -> DMESG-WARN (fdo#106000) +1

    igt@kms_flip@basic-plain-flip:
      fi-glk-j4005:       PASS -> DMESG-WARN (fdo#106097)

    igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@suspend-read-crc-pipe-b:
      fi-snb-2520m:       PASS -> INCOMPLETE (fdo#103713)

    
    ==== Possible fixes ====

    igt@core_auth@basic-auth:
      fi-bdw-gvtdvm:      DMESG-WARN (fdo#105600) -> PASS +2

    igt@kms_flip@basic-flip-vs-modeset:
      fi-glk-j4005:       DMESG-WARN (fdo#106000) -> PASS +2

    igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@read-crc-pipe-b-frame-sequence:
      fi-glk-j4005:       FAIL (fdo#103481) -> PASS

    igt@kms_pipe_crc_basic@suspend-read-crc-pipe-b:
      fi-cnl-psr:         DMESG-WARN (fdo#104951) -> PASS

    igt@prime_vgem@basic-fence-flip:
      fi-ilk-650:         FAIL (fdo#104008) -> PASS

    
  fdo#102575 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102575
  fdo#103481 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103481
  fdo#103713 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103713
  fdo#104008 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104008
  fdo#104951 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104951
  fdo#105600 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105600
  fdo#106000 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106000
  fdo#106097 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106097
  fdo#106725 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106725


== Participating hosts (40 -> 37) ==

  Missing    (3): fi-ilk-m540 fi-byt-squawks fi-skl-6700hq 


== Build changes ==

    * IGT: IGT_4509 -> IGTPW_1429

  CI_DRM_4289: 0e963d962be75b4e3d3d1c884e1bf4600473096d @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
  IGTPW_1429: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/IGTPW_1429/
  IGT_4509: c8f1ae58e1b7da17af4722a5ce5a9cd8b9a34059 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/intel-gpu-tools

== Logs ==

For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/IGTPW_1429/issues.html
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev

[igt-dev] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: success for igt/gem_exec_await: Tag the final batch in the GTT

[Patchwork]

== Series Details ==

Series: igt/gem_exec_await: Tag the final batch in the GTT
URL   : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/44415/
State : success

== Summary ==

= CI Bug Log - changes from IGT_4509_full -> IGTPW_1429_full =

== Summary - WARNING ==

  Minor unknown changes coming with IGTPW_1429_full need to be verified
  manually.
  
  If you think the reported changes have nothing to do with the changes
  introduced in IGTPW_1429_full, please notify your bug team to allow them
  to document this new failure mode, which will reduce false positives in CI.

  External URL: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/api/1.0/series/44415/revisions/1/mbox/

== Possible new issues ==

  Here are the unknown changes that may have been introduced in IGTPW_1429_full:

  === IGT changes ===

    ==== Warnings ====

    igt@gem_exec_schedule@deep-vebox:
      shard-kbl:          SKIP -> PASS

    igt@pm_rc6_residency@rc6-accuracy:
      shard-kbl:          PASS -> SKIP +1

    
== Known issues ==

  Here are the changes found in IGTPW_1429_full that come from known issues:

  === IGT changes ===

    ==== Issues hit ====

    igt@gem_pwrite_pread@uncached-pwrite-blt-gtt_mmap-performance:
      shard-snb:          PASS -> INCOMPLETE (fdo#105411)

    igt@kms_atomic_transition@1x-modeset-transitions-nonblocking:
      shard-glk:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#105703)

    igt@kms_available_modes_crc@available_mode_test_crc:
      shard-snb:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#106641)

    igt@kms_flip@2x-plain-flip-ts-check:
      shard-hsw:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103928)

    igt@kms_flip@plain-flip-ts-check-interruptible:
      shard-glk:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#100368)

    igt@kms_flip_tiling@flip-to-y-tiled:
      shard-glk:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#104724)

    igt@kms_plane_multiple@atomic-pipe-a-tiling-x:
      shard-snb:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#104724, fdo#103166)

    igt@kms_rotation_crc@sprite-rotation-180:
      shard-snb:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#103925, fdo#104724)

    igt@kms_setmode@basic:
      shard-apl:          PASS -> FAIL (fdo#99912)

    igt@pm_rpm@system-suspend-modeset:
      shard-kbl:          PASS -> INCOMPLETE (fdo#103665)

    
    ==== Possible fixes ====

    igt@drv_selftest@live_hangcheck:
      shard-kbl:          DMESG-FAIL (fdo#106560) -> PASS

    igt@kms_flip@2x-dpms-vs-vblank-race-interruptible:
      shard-hsw:          FAIL (fdo#103060) -> PASS

    igt@kms_flip@2x-plain-flip-fb-recreate:
      shard-hsw:          FAIL (fdo#100368) -> PASS

    igt@kms_flip@2x-plain-flip-fb-recreate-interruptible:
      shard-glk:          FAIL (fdo#100368) -> PASS +1

    igt@kms_flip_tiling@flip-y-tiled:
      shard-glk:          FAIL (fdo#104724) -> PASS

    igt@perf_pmu@multi-client-vcs1:
      shard-snb:          INCOMPLETE (fdo#105411) -> SKIP

    
    ==== Warnings ====

    igt@gem_eio@hibernate:
      shard-snb:          INCOMPLETE (fdo#105411) -> FAIL (fdo#105957)

    
  fdo#100368 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=100368
  fdo#103060 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103060
  fdo#103166 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103166
  fdo#103665 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103665
  fdo#103925 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103925
  fdo#103928 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103928
  fdo#104724 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104724
  fdo#105411 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105411
  fdo#105703 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105703
  fdo#105957 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105957
  fdo#106560 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106560
  fdo#106641 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=106641
  fdo#99912 https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99912


== Participating hosts (5 -> 5) ==

  No changes in participating hosts


== Build changes ==

    * IGT: IGT_4509 -> IGTPW_1429
    * Linux: CI_DRM_4282 -> CI_DRM_4289

  CI_DRM_4282: c1064b9be065603680d060184da1a93d404dcf0c @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
  CI_DRM_4289: 0e963d962be75b4e3d3d1c884e1bf4600473096d @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/gfx-ci/linux
  IGTPW_1429: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/IGTPW_1429/
  IGT_4509: c8f1ae58e1b7da17af4722a5ce5a9cd8b9a34059 @ git://anongit.freedesktop.org/xorg/app/intel-gpu-tools

== Logs ==

For more details see: https://intel-gfx-ci.01.org/tree/drm-tip/IGTPW_1429/shards.html
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev

Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] igt/gem_exec_await: Tag the final batch in the GTT

[Katarzyna Dec]

On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 04:27:22PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Batches are contained in their position within the GTT by the kernel,
> and if they are in an invalid poistion will be unbound and rebound
> before execution. In our test setup, we therefore need to place the
> batch into a valid poistion within the GTT before we fill the ring with
> busyspinners.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Katarzyna Dec <katarzyna.dec@intel.com>

Kasia :)
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] igt/gem_exec_await: Tag the final batch in the GTT

[Katarzyna Dec]

On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 04:27:22PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Batches are contained in their position within the GTT by the kernel,
> and if they are in an invalid poistion will be unbound and rebound
> before execution. In our test setup, we therefore need to place the
> batch into a valid poistion within the GTT before we fill the ring with
> busyspinners.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Reviewed-by: Katarzyna Dec <katarzyna.dec@intel.com>

Kasia :)
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev

Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] igt/gem_exec_await: Tag the final batch in the GTT

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Katarzyna Dec (2018-06-08 08:36:35)
> On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 04:27:22PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Batches are contained in their position within the GTT by the kernel,
> > and if they are in an invalid poistion will be unbound and rebound
> > before execution. In our test setup, we therefore need to place the
> > batch into a valid poistion within the GTT before we fill the ring with
> > busyspinners.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Reviewed-by: Katarzyna Dec <katarzyna.dec@intel.com>

Sorry for being curt on irc, not enough coffee.

The problem entirely lies in how we are constructing our set of busy
spinning batches. We try to fill the ring with a chain of batches that
are all linked to one buffer, and then try to execute that buffer. This
gives us the most implicit fences on that one buffer we can trivially
construct; with the goal being that the kernel handles them all with
aplomb. However, what we failed to take into account was that we might
end up with that final buffer being at address 0, which is in an invalid
location to execute from (because reasons) and the kernel would be
forced to move it. However, since we have a ring full of busy spinners
all using that buffer, we can not move that buffer until we wait for the
queue to complete -- which it never will and so we declare a GPU hang,
failing the test.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [Intel-gfx] [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] igt/gem_exec_await: Tag the final batch in the GTT

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Katarzyna Dec (2018-06-08 08:36:35)
> On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 04:27:22PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Batches are contained in their position within the GTT by the kernel,
> > and if they are in an invalid poistion will be unbound and rebound
> > before execution. In our test setup, we therefore need to place the
> > batch into a valid poistion within the GTT before we fill the ring with
> > busyspinners.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> Reviewed-by: Katarzyna Dec <katarzyna.dec@intel.com>

Sorry for being curt on irc, not enough coffee.

The problem entirely lies in how we are constructing our set of busy
spinning batches. We try to fill the ring with a chain of batches that
are all linked to one buffer, and then try to execute that buffer. This
gives us the most implicit fences on that one buffer we can trivially
construct; with the goal being that the kernel handles them all with
aplomb. However, what we failed to take into account was that we might
end up with that final buffer being at address 0, which is in an invalid
location to execute from (because reasons) and the kernel would be
forced to move it. However, since we have a ring full of busy spinners
all using that buffer, we can not move that buffer until we wait for the
queue to complete -- which it never will and so we declare a GPU hang,
failing the test.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] igt/gem_exec_await: Tag the final batch in the GTT

[Katarzyna Dec]

On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 08:57:15AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Katarzyna Dec (2018-06-08 08:36:35)
> > On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 04:27:22PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > > Batches are contained in their position within the GTT by the kernel,
> > > and if they are in an invalid poistion will be unbound and rebound
> > > before execution. In our test setup, we therefore need to place the
> > > batch into a valid poistion within the GTT before we fill the ring with
> > > busyspinners.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Reviewed-by: Katarzyna Dec <katarzyna.dec@intel.com>
> 
> Sorry for being curt on irc, not enough coffee.
> 
> The problem entirely lies in how we are constructing our set of busy
> spinning batches. We try to fill the ring with a chain of batches that
> are all linked to one buffer, and then try to execute that buffer. This
> gives us the most implicit fences on that one buffer we can trivially
> construct; with the goal being that the kernel handles them all with
> aplomb. However, what we failed to take into account was that we might
> end up with that final buffer being at address 0, which is in an invalid
> location to execute from (because reasons) and the kernel would be
> forced to move it. However, since we have a ring full of busy spinners
> all using that buffer, we can not move that buffer until we wait for the
> queue to complete -- which it never will and so we declare a GPU hang,
> failing the test.
> -Chris

I guess I as well had issues with lack of caffeine this morning and somehow
was not persistent enough to inquire this patch :)
Thanks for clarification :)
Kasia
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev