Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Be a little more conservative in our ring measurement and exclude one > batch to leave room in case our user needs to wrap (where a request will > be expanded to cover the unused space at the end of the ring). > did read the wrapping part and that seems to be the case that we enlarge the wrapping request. However do we lose some coverage on the actual wrap tests? -Mika > References: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=111374 > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > lib/i915/gem_ring.c | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/lib/i915/gem_ring.c b/lib/i915/gem_ring.c > index fdb9fc1b1..bf7f439e1 100644 > --- a/lib/i915/gem_ring.c > +++ b/lib/i915/gem_ring.c > @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ __gem_measure_ring_inflight(int fd, unsigned int engine, enum measure_ring_flags > } while (1); > > igt_assert_eq(__execbuf(fd, &execbuf), -EINTR); > - igt_assert(count); > + igt_assert(count > 1); > > memset(&itv, 0, sizeof(itv)); > setitimer(ITIMER_REAL, &itv, NULL); > @@ -118,7 +118,8 @@ __gem_measure_ring_inflight(int fd, unsigned int engine, enum measure_ring_flags > > gem_quiescent_gpu(fd); > > - return count; > + /* Be conservative in case we must wrap later */ > + return count - 1; > } > > /** > -- > 2.23.0.rc1 _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
