All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Dixit, Ashutosh" <ashutosh.dixit@intel.com>
To: <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
Cc: <IGT-Dev@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org>, <Intel-GFX@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/i915: Skip gem_exec_fair on GuC based platforms
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 15:53:06 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ily0ilkd.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211013224317.943625-1-John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>

On Wed, 13 Oct 2021 15:43:17 -0700, <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com> wrote:
>
> From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
>
> The gem_exec_fair test is specifically testing scheduler algorithm
> performance. However, GuC does not implement the same algorithm as
> execlist mode and this test is not applicable. So, until sw arch
> approves a new algorithm and it is implemented in GuC, stop running
> the test.
>
> Signed-off-by: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
> ---
>  tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c b/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c
> index ef5a450f6..ca9c73c6e 100644
> --- a/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c
> +++ b/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c
> @@ -1314,6 +1314,12 @@ igt_main
>		igt_require(gem_scheduler_enabled(i915));
>		igt_require(gem_scheduler_has_ctx_priority(i915));
>
> +		/*
> +		 * These tests are for a specific scheduling model which is
> +		 * not currently implemented by GuC. So skip on GuC platforms.
> +		 */
> +		igt_require(intel_gen(intel_get_drm_devid(i915)) < 12);

Probably a feature check rather than a version check is better? Can we use
say gem_has_guc_submission() instead?

Though appears gem_has_guc_submission() only checks if guc submission is
available, not if it is actually in use (unless guc will used when
available automatically)? Is it possible to add the check if guc submission
is actually in use? Or a check for guc scheduler?

> +
>		cfg = intel_ctx_cfg_all_physical(i915);
>
>		igt_info("CS timestamp frequency: %d\n",
> --
> 2.25.1
>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Dixit, Ashutosh" <ashutosh.dixit@intel.com>
To: John.C.Harrison@Intel.com
Cc: IGT-Dev@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org, Intel-GFX@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org
Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/i915: Skip gem_exec_fair on GuC based platforms
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 15:53:06 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ily0ilkd.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211013224317.943625-1-John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>

On Wed, 13 Oct 2021 15:43:17 -0700, <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com> wrote:
>
> From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
>
> The gem_exec_fair test is specifically testing scheduler algorithm
> performance. However, GuC does not implement the same algorithm as
> execlist mode and this test is not applicable. So, until sw arch
> approves a new algorithm and it is implemented in GuC, stop running
> the test.
>
> Signed-off-by: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
> ---
>  tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c b/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c
> index ef5a450f6..ca9c73c6e 100644
> --- a/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c
> +++ b/tests/i915/gem_exec_fair.c
> @@ -1314,6 +1314,12 @@ igt_main
>		igt_require(gem_scheduler_enabled(i915));
>		igt_require(gem_scheduler_has_ctx_priority(i915));
>
> +		/*
> +		 * These tests are for a specific scheduling model which is
> +		 * not currently implemented by GuC. So skip on GuC platforms.
> +		 */
> +		igt_require(intel_gen(intel_get_drm_devid(i915)) < 12);

Probably a feature check rather than a version check is better? Can we use
say gem_has_guc_submission() instead?

Though appears gem_has_guc_submission() only checks if guc submission is
available, not if it is actually in use (unless guc will used when
available automatically)? Is it possible to add the check if guc submission
is actually in use? Or a check for guc scheduler?

> +
>		cfg = intel_ctx_cfg_all_physical(i915);
>
>		igt_info("CS timestamp frequency: %d\n",
> --
> 2.25.1
>

  reply	other threads:[~2021-10-13 22:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-13 22:43 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] tests/i915: Skip gem_exec_fair on GuC based platforms John.C.Harrison
2021-10-13 22:53 ` Dixit, Ashutosh [this message]
2021-10-13 22:53   ` [igt-dev] " Dixit, Ashutosh
2021-10-14  1:07   ` John Harrison
2021-10-14  1:07     ` John Harrison
2021-10-14  3:21     ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2021-10-14  3:21       ` [igt-dev] " Dixit, Ashutosh
2021-10-13 23:38 ` [igt-dev] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2021-10-14  1:04 ` [igt-dev] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2021-10-14  7:45 ` [Intel-gfx] [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] " Tvrtko Ursulin
2021-10-14  7:45   ` Tvrtko Ursulin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87ily0ilkd.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com \
    --to=ashutosh.dixit@intel.com \
    --cc=IGT-Dev@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org \
    --cc=Intel-GFX@Lists.FreeDesktop.Org \
    --cc=John.C.Harrison@Intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.