[PATCH i-g-t] i915/gem_exec_schedule: Split pi-ringfull into two tests

* [PATCH i-g-t] i915/gem_exec_schedule: Split pi-ringfull into two tests
@ 2019-11-08 18:34 ` Chris Wilson
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Chris Wilson @ 2019-11-08 18:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: intel-gfx; +Cc: igt-dev

pi-ringfull uses 2 contexts that share a buffer. The intent was that the
contexts were independent, but it was the effect of the global lock held
by the low priority client that prevented the high priority client from
executing. I began to add a second variant where there was a shared
resource which may induce a priority inversion, only to notice the
existing test already imposed a shared resource. Hence adding a second
test to rerun pi-ringfull in both unshared and shared resource modes.

Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
---
 tests/i915/gem_exec_schedule.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_exec_schedule.c b/tests/i915/gem_exec_schedule.c
index 5c15f1770..84581bffe 100644
--- a/tests/i915/gem_exec_schedule.c
+++ b/tests/i915/gem_exec_schedule.c
@@ -1468,7 +1468,8 @@ static void bind_to_cpu(int cpu)
 	igt_assert(sched_setaffinity(getpid(), sizeof(cpu_set_t), &allowed) == 0);
 }
 
-static void test_pi_ringfull(int fd, unsigned int engine)
+static void test_pi_ringfull(int fd, unsigned int engine, unsigned int flags)
+#define SHARED BIT(0)
 {
 	const uint32_t bbe = MI_BATCH_BUFFER_END;
 	struct sigaction sa = { .sa_handler = alarm_handler };
@@ -1480,6 +1481,24 @@ static void test_pi_ringfull(int fd, unsigned int engine)
 	uint32_t vip;
 	bool *result;
 
+	/*
+	 * We start simple. A low priority client should never prevent a high
+	 * priority client from submitting their work; even if the low priority
+	 * client exhausts their ringbuffer and so is throttled.
+	 *
+	 * SHARED: A variant on the above rule is that even is the 2 clients
+	 * share a read-only resource, the blocked low priority client should
+	 * not prevent the high priority client from executing. A buffer,
+	 * e.g. the batch buffer, that is shared only for reads (no write
+	 * hazard, so the reads can be executed in parallel or in any order),
+	 * so not cause priority inversion due to the resource conflict.
+	 *
+	 * First, we have the low priority context who fills their ring and so
+	 * blocks. As soon as that context blocks, we try to submit a high
+	 * priority batch, which should be executed immediately before the low
+	 * priority context is unblocked.
+	 */
+
 	result = mmap(NULL, 4096, PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED | MAP_ANON, -1, 0);
 	igt_assert(result != MAP_FAILED);
 
@@ -1545,6 +1564,12 @@ static void test_pi_ringfull(int fd, unsigned int engine)
 	igt_fork(child, 1) {
 		int err;
 
+		/* Replace our batch to avoid conflicts over shared resources? */
+		if (!(flags & SHARED)) {
+			obj[1].handle = gem_create(fd, 4096);
+			gem_write(fd, obj[1].handle, 0, &bbe, sizeof(bbe));
+		}
+
 		result[0] = vip != execbuf.rsvd1;
 
 		igt_debug("Waking parent\n");
@@ -1557,7 +1582,8 @@ static void test_pi_ringfull(int fd, unsigned int engine)
 		itv.it_value.tv_usec = 10000;
 		setitimer(ITIMER_REAL, &itv, NULL);
 
-		/* Since we are the high priority task, we expect to be
+		/*
+		 * Since we are the high priority task, we expect to be
 		 * able to add ourselves to *our* ring without interruption.
 		 */
 		igt_debug("HP child executing\n");
@@ -1569,6 +1595,9 @@ static void test_pi_ringfull(int fd, unsigned int engine)
 		setitimer(ITIMER_REAL, &itv, NULL);
 
 		result[2] = err == 0;
+
+		if (!(flags & SHARED))
+			gem_close(fd, obj[1].handle);
 	}
 
 	/* Relinquish CPU just to allow child to create a context */
@@ -1831,7 +1860,10 @@ igt_main
 				}
 
 				igt_subtest_f("pi-ringfull-%s", e->name)
-					test_pi_ringfull(fd, eb_ring(e));
+					test_pi_ringfull(fd, eb_ring(e), 0);
+
+				igt_subtest_f("pi-common-%s", e->name)
+					test_pi_ringfull(fd, eb_ring(e), SHARED);
 			}
 		}
 	}
-- 
2.24.0

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

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread