On Tue, 2023-07-11 at 11:49 -0700, Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele wrote:
> <snip>
> > > > @@ -134,6 +193,8 @@ static int __run_selftests(const char *name,
> > > > {
> > > > int err = 0;
> > > >
> > > > + __wait_on_all_system_dependencies(data);
> > > Why does this need to be top level selftests and not just a wait for
> > > intel_gsc_uc_fw_proxy_init_done in the tests where it is relevant, via
> > > some helper or something?
> > Alan: it was an offline decision because we didn't want to repeat
> > the same check for all permutations of selftests' subtests (i.e. considering
> > module params can dictate to skip some subtests but execute others).
> >
> > Anyways, let me get back to you on how how many selftests' subtests actually excercise the
> > need for proxy-init to complete - if its just 1-to-2 subtest I'll move the remove the code
> > from here and move them into the individual subtests.
>
> I don't think it is going to be easy to figure out which selftest are
> impacted. All selftests looping on all engines of course, but also tests
> triggering GT resets and/or messing with the system in other ways. Any
> new tests added will also need to be evaluated.
>
> IMO there is minimal impact of having this check on every test. When
> running selftests we load i915 after the rest of the system has already
> fully booted, so there are no delays in getting the mei component up and
> therefore proxy init is sometimes completed even before the selftest
> code starts; when we do have to wait, it's usually for a very short
> time, because the expected total execution time for the GSC worker when
> not having to wait for the mei component to load is ~750ms (~200ms for
> GSC load + 20ms for HuC auth + ~500ms for proxy init). Having a few
> seconds added to the total selftests runtime is IMO a better option that
> having to maintain a list of impacted tests.
>
> Daniele
>
Thanks Daniele - I completely forgot about reset or other system disruptive tests.
For now I'll re-rev to address Tvrtko's other comments but will keep the waiter
as 'once-top-down' for now and wait for Tvrtko's thoughts on that next rev.
...alan
