On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 06:17:48PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> On 20/12/2016 13:07, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >@@ -522,6 +534,11 @@ static struct pci_driver i915_pci_driver = {
> > static int __init i915_init(void)
> > {
> > bool use_kms = true;
> >+ int err;
> >+
> >+ err = i915_mock_selftests();
> >+ if (err)
> >+ return err > 0 ? 0 : err;
>
> Am I again confused by the return codes? :) Module param of -1 will
> result in i915_mock_selftests returning 1, which here translates to
> 0 so it won't abort the load like it should.
I had to give up on that for silent passing and do the remove from
userspace on success instead. Returning anything other than 0 causes noise
in dmesg. That I can live with after an error during the selftest, since
dmesg should also contain more details on the test failure.
If i915.mock_selftests=-1 then we run the tests and stop. We just leave
the module loaded even though it hasn't bound to any pci devices. :|
igt/drv_selftest and kselftests/gpu/i915.sh then unload the module.
> >+static void set_default_test_all(struct selftest *st, unsigned long count)
> >+{
> >+ unsigned long i;
> >+
> >+ for (i = 0; i < count; i++)
> >+ if (st[i].enabled)
> >+ return;
> >+
> >+ for (i = 0; i < count; i++)
> >+ st[i].enabled = true;
> >+}
>
> unsigned int should be enough for everyone! :) (i & count)
Such shortsightedness!
> >+static int run_selftests(const char *name,
> >+ struct selftest *st,
> >+ unsigned long count,
> >+ void *data)
> >+{
> >+ int err = 0;
> >+
>
> If I got it right:
>
> /* Make sure both live and mock run with the same seed if ran one
> after another. */
Yes, choose the seed once, run every selected test with the same seed.
> ? just not sure what happens if user sets zero.
I wasn't such if 0 was a valid seed, so I wasn't caring too much if the
user did i915.st_random_seed=0. They will see the pr_info() and go
wtf, and hopefully don't do that again.
> >+ while (!i915_selftest.random_seed)
> >+ i915_selftest.random_seed = get_random_int();
> >+
> >+ i915_selftest.timeout_jiffies =
> >+ i915_selftest.timeout_ms ?
> >+ msecs_to_jiffies_timeout(i915_selftest.timeout_ms) :
> >+ MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT;
> >+
> >+ set_default_test_all(st, count);
> >+
> >+ pr_info("i915: Performing %s selftests with st_random_seed=%x and st_timeout=%u\n",
> >+ name, i915_selftest.random_seed, i915_selftest.timeout_ms);
> >+
> >+ /* Tests are listed in order in i915_*_selftests.h */
> >+ for (; count--; st++) {
> >+ if (!st->enabled)
> >+ continue;
> >+
> >+ cond_resched();
> >+ if (signal_pending(current))
> >+ return -EINTR;
> >+
> >+ pr_debug("i915: Running %s\n", st->name);
> >+ if (data)
> >+ err = st->live(data);
> >+ else
> >+ err = st->mock();
> >+ if (err)
> >+ break;
> >+ }
> >+
> >+ if (WARN(err > 0 || err == -ENOTTY,
> >+ "%s returned %d, conflicting with selftest's magic values!\n",
> >+ st->name, err))
> >+ err = -1;
> >+
> >+ rcu_barrier();
>
> Why this?
Paranoia for the tests aborting without the barrier, as we can't rely on
module_unload providing it since we may go on to load the driver as
normal.
-Chris
--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
