Hi Shuah,
On Wed, 2017-08-02 at 13:45 -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 07/31/2017 01:43 PM, Gustavo Padovan wrote:
> > 2017-07-30 Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >
> > > Quoting Gustavo Padovan (2017-07-29 16:22:17)
> > > > From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > We found this bug in the sw_sync so adding a test case to
> > > > prevent it to
> > > > happen in the future.
> > > >
> > > > Cc: Shuah Khan <shuahkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: linux-kselftest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > To be applied after the TAP13 convertion patches.
> > > > ---
> > > > tools/testing/selftests/sync/sync_fence.c | 23
> > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > tools/testing/selftests/sync/sync_test.c | 1 +
> > > > tools/testing/selftests/sync/synctest.h | 1 +
> > > > 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/sync/sync_fence.c
> > > > b/tools/testing/selftests/sync/sync_fence.c
> > > > index 13f1752..70cfa61 100644
> > > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/sync/sync_fence.c
> > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/sync/sync_fence.c
> > > > @@ -29,6 +29,29 @@
> > > > #include "sw_sync.h"
> > > > #include "synctest.h"
> > > >
> > > > +int test_close_fence_fd_before_inc(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > + int fence, valid, ret;
> > > > + int timeline = sw_sync_timeline_create();
> > > > +
> > > > + valid = sw_sync_timeline_is_valid(timeline);
> > > > + ASSERT(valid, "Failure allocating timeline\n");
> > > > +
> > > > + fence = sw_sync_fence_create(timeline, "allocFence",
> > > > 1);
> > > > + valid = sw_sync_fence_is_valid(fence);
> > > > + ASSERT(valid, "Failure allocating fence\n");
> > > > +
> > >
> > > /*
> > > * We want the destroy + inc to run within the same RCU grace
> > > period so
> > > * that the zombie fence still exists on the timeline.
> > > */
> > >
> > > > + sw_sync_fence_destroy(fence);
> > >
> > > I think this doesn't exercise the bug you found as we should be
> > > entering
> > > the timeline_inc loop with fence.refcount==0 rather than the
> > > refcount
> > > going to zero within the loop.
> > >
> > > To achieve that we need to find a callback that does unreference
> > > a
> > > dma-fence and chain those together so that it frees a sw_sync
> > > from the
> > > same timeline.
> >
> > Indeed. Without the internal callback this test is a bit useless.
> > We
> > could test this under drm atomic tests on IGT. Particulary, I hit
> > it
> > playing with tests for v4l2 fences.
> >
>
> Hi Gustavo,
>
> Would you like this pulled into 4.14-rc1? Sounds like this test is
> for a
> feature that doesn't exist yet?
It is for the current code, but I need to find a better way to trigger
what I want. I'll rethink this test and resend.
Gustavo
--
Gustavo Padovan
Collabora Ltd.
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
