Quoting Chris Wilson (2019-05-15 20:57:18) > Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2019-05-15 11:58:20) > > > > On 08/05/2019 11:09, Chris Wilson wrote: > > > + igt_assert_f(load > 0.90, > > > + "engine %d (class:instance %d:%d) was found to be only %.1f%% busy\n", > > > + n, siblings[n].engine_class, siblings[n].engine_instance, > > > + load*100); > > > > Master also needs to be checked I think. You have the infrastructure to > > open two pmus in the previous patch so should be easy. > > Haven't we checked precisely that in earlier tests? What would perhaps > be fairer here would be to verify the other engine was idle, otherwise > we could say we fluked it. Furthermore, we should repeat a few times > with say (0, 1), (0, 1), (1, 0), (1, 0) to further rule out flukes, and > then to finish with a random smoketest of some description. > > Perhaps even a test is closer to the typical workload would involve > semaphore communication across the bond. But I don't know a way in which > I can determine which engine I am on in order to record that from the > GPU itself. To remind myself, the importance here is on uABI stressing, it's is much easier to prove the relationship in the kernel and that is where we do. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
