Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/1] Fix gem_ctx_persistence failures with GuC submission

[Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>]

On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 05:33:59PM -0700, Matthew Brost wrote:
> Should fix below failures with GuC submission for the following tests:
> gem_exec_balancer --r noheartbeat
> gem_ctx_persistence --r heartbeat-close
> 
> Not going to fix:
> gem_ctx_persistence --r heartbeat-many
> gem_ctx_persistence --r heartbeat-stop

After looking at that big thread and being very confused: Are we fixing an
actual use-case here, or is this another case of blindly following igts
tests just because they exist?

I'm leaning towards that we should stall on this, and first document what
exactly is the actual intention behind all this, and then fix up the tests
to match (if needed). And only then fix up GuC to match whatever we
actually want to do.
-Daniel

> 
> As the above tests change the heartbeat value to 0 (off) after the
> context is closed and we have no way to detect that with GuC submission
> unless we keep a list of closed but running contexts which seems like
> overkill for a non-real world use case. We likely should just skip these
> tests with GuC submission.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> 
> Matthew Brost (1):
>   drm/i915: Check if engine has heartbeat when closing a context
> 
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gem/i915_gem_context.c   |  5 +++--
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_context_types.h |  2 ++
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_engine.h        | 21 ++-----------------
>  .../drm/i915/gt/intel_execlists_submission.c  | 14 +++++++++++++
>  .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c |  6 +++++-
>  .../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.h |  2 --
>  6 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 2.28.0
> 

-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch