Hi Sowmya,
Thanks for the patch. If you could send it to the
igt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx list instead, this is where the IGT
patches go.
Could you refresh my memory as to what this is fixing?
It sounds like this is just adjusting a value to match more common settings.
Cheers,
-Lionel
On 27/08/2020 10:38, Sowmya Kaparthi wrote:
The blocking/polling parameterized tests were introduced to test
different hrtimer configurations.These tests check how many times the
process wakes up to read the reports with different hrtimer values (=
duration of test / hrtimer value). A user is more likely to choose a
larger hrtimer value than the default 5ms to avoid wake up too frequently.
Cc: Landwerlin, Lionel G <lionel.g.landwerlin@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sowmya Kaparthi <sowmyax.kaparthi@xxxxxxxxx>
---
tests/i915/perf.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tests/i915/perf.c b/tests/i915/perf.c
index a894fd38..5fd1193f 100644
--- a/tests/i915/perf.c
+++ b/tests/i915/perf.c
@@ -4995,7 +4995,7 @@ igt_main
40 * 1000 * 1000 /* default 40ms hrtimer */);
test_blocking(500 * 1000 /* 500us oa period */,
true /* set_kernel_hrtimer */,
- 2 * 1000 * 1000 /* default 2ms hrtimer */);
+ 10 * 1000 * 1000 /* default 10ms hrtimer */);
}
igt_describe("Test polled read with default hrtimer frequency");
@@ -5014,7 +5014,7 @@ igt_main
40 * 1000 * 1000 /* default 40ms hrtimer */);
test_polling(500 * 1000 /* 500us oa period */,
true /* set_kernel_hrtimer */,
- 2 * 1000 * 1000 /* default 2ms hrtimer */);
+ 10 * 1000 * 1000 /* default 10ms hrtimer */);
}
igt_describe("Test polled read with buffer size smaller than available data");
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
