On Wed, 2019-12-04 at 13:20 +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Do not blindly assume 30 spin batches will always fit into the ring,
> but
> use our measurement tool instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> tests/perf_pmu.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/perf_pmu.c b/tests/perf_pmu.c
> index de4c231dd..8e50ac9a0 100644
> --- a/tests/perf_pmu.c
> +++ b/tests/perf_pmu.c
> @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@
> #include "igt_perf.h"
> #include "igt_sysfs.h"
> #include "igt_pm.h"
> +#include "i915/gem_ring.h"
> #include "sw_sync.h"
>
> IGT_TEST_DESCRIPTION("Test the i915 pmu perf interface");
> @@ -1276,8 +1277,9 @@ static void cpu_hotplug(int gem_fd)
> static void
> test_interrupts(int gem_fd)
> {
> + const int target =
> + gem_measure_ring_inflight(gem_fd, I915_EXEC_DEFAULT,
> 0);
In case we ever want to change this engine, should we make
I915_EXEC_DEFAULT a macro within this test?
Looks a lot better. My only question here is can we make
gem_measure_ring_inflight a generic routine instead of something i915-
specific, since we're using this in one of the cross-arch tests?
Thanks,
Stuart
> const unsigned int test_duration_ms = 1000;
> - const int target = 30;
> igt_spin_t *spin[target];
> struct pollfd pfd;
> uint64_t idle, busy;
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
