Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2021-02-16 10:50:50) > From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> > > Test that periodic reads of engine busyness against a constant 100% load > are within the 5000ppm tolerance when comparing perf timestamp versus > counter values. We've previously only included the accuracy tests on platforms that claim to be accurate. Can we rephrase the goal of the test such that it sounds more like a universal truth that should also be valid for the sampling backends? "The busyness should never exceed 100% (within a margin of error)..." And since accuracy is currently protected by has_busy_stats, let's try to find a different name. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
