On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 13:48 -0600, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 03:05:03PM +0300, Imre Deak wrote:
> > On Tue, 2014-04-15 at 10:38 +0800, Zhao Yakui wrote:
> > > The Broadwell GT3 machine has two independent BSD rings in kernel driver while
> > > it is transparent to the user-space driver. In such case it needs to check
> > > the CPU<->GPU sync for the second BSD ring.
> > >
> > > V1->V2: Follow Daniel's comment to add one subtext instead of one individual
> > > test case, which is used to test the CPU<->GPU sync under multi BSD rings
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Zhao Yakui <yakui.zhao@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > tests/gem_dummy_reloc_loop.c | 102 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 101 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/tests/gem_dummy_reloc_loop.c b/tests/gem_dummy_reloc_loop.c
> > > index a61b59b..660d8e1 100644
> > > --- a/tests/gem_dummy_reloc_loop.c
> > > +++ b/tests/gem_dummy_reloc_loop.c
> > > @@ -48,6 +48,13 @@ static drm_intel_bufmgr *bufmgr;
> > > struct intel_batchbuffer *batch;
> > > static drm_intel_bo *target_buffer;
> > >
> > > +#define NUM_FD 50
> > > +
> > > +static int mfd[NUM_FD];
> > > +static drm_intel_bufmgr *mbufmgr[NUM_FD];
> > > +static struct intel_batchbuffer *mbatch[NUM_FD];
> > > +static drm_intel_bo *mbuffer[NUM_FD];
> > > +
> > > /*
> > > * Testcase: Basic check of ring<->cpu sync using a dummy reloc
> > > *
> > > @@ -124,6 +131,50 @@ dummy_reloc_loop_random_ring(int num_rings)
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > > +static void
> > > +dummy_reloc_loop_random_ring_multi_fd(int num_rings)
> > > +{
> > > + int i;
> > > + struct intel_batchbuffer *saved_batch;
> > > +
> > > + saved_batch = batch;
> > > +
> > > + srandom(0xdeadbeef);
> > > +
> > > + for (i = 0; i < 0x100000; i++) {
> > > + int mindex;
> > > + int ring = random() % num_rings + 1;
> > > +
> > > + mindex = random() % NUM_FD;
> > > + batch = mbatch[mindex];
> > > +
> > > + if (ring == I915_EXEC_RENDER) {
> > > + BEGIN_BATCH(4);
> > > + OUT_BATCH(MI_COND_BATCH_BUFFER_END | MI_DO_COMPARE);
> > > + OUT_BATCH(0xffffffff); /* compare dword */
> > > + OUT_RELOC(mbuffer[mindex], I915_GEM_DOMAIN_RENDER,
> > > + I915_GEM_DOMAIN_RENDER, 0);
> > > + OUT_BATCH(MI_NOOP);
> > > + ADVANCE_BATCH();
> > > + } else {
> > > + BEGIN_BATCH(4);
> > > + OUT_BATCH(MI_FLUSH_DW | 1);
> > > + OUT_BATCH(0); /* reserved */
> > > + OUT_RELOC(mbuffer[mindex], I915_GEM_DOMAIN_RENDER,
> > > + I915_GEM_DOMAIN_RENDER, 0);
> > > + OUT_BATCH(MI_NOOP | (1<<22) | (0xf));
> > > + ADVANCE_BATCH();
> > > + }
> > > + intel_batchbuffer_flush_on_ring(batch, ring);
> > > +
> > > + drm_intel_bo_map(target_buffer, 0);
> > > + // map to force waiting on rendering
> > > + drm_intel_bo_unmap(target_buffer);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + batch = saved_batch;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > int fd;
> > > int devid;
> > > int num_rings;
> > > @@ -133,6 +184,7 @@ igt_main
> > > igt_skip_on_simulation();
> > >
> > > igt_fixture {
> > > + int i;
> > > fd = drm_open_any();
> > > devid = intel_get_drm_devid(fd);
> > > num_rings = gem_get_num_rings(fd);
> > > @@ -148,6 +200,35 @@ igt_main
> > >
> > > target_buffer = drm_intel_bo_alloc(bufmgr, "target bo", 4096, 4096);
> > > igt_assert(target_buffer);
> > > +
> > > + /* Create multi drm_fd and map one gem object to multi gem_contexts */
> > > + {
> > > + unsigned int target_flink;
> > > + char buffer_name[32];
> > > + if (dri_bo_flink(target_buffer, &target_flink)) {
> > > + printf("fail to get flink for target buffer\n");
> > > + igt_assert(0);
> >
> > For the future: could be just igt_assert_f().
>
> Yeah I think for new testcases we should try to use the latest igt_*
> macros and helpers as much as possible. Reducing control flow and
> replacing it by the right igt_assert/require/... macro imo really helps
> the readability of testcases.
Hi, Daniel/Imre
Thanks for your comments and advice.
I will update it.
Thanks.
Yakui
> -Daniel
> >
> > > + }
> > > + for (i = 0; i < NUM_FD; i++) {
> > > + mfd[i] = 0;
> > > + mbufmgr[i] = NULL;
> > > + mbuffer[i] = NULL;
> > > + }
> >
> > Nitpick: the above are all statics, so no need to init them.
> >
> > Other than the above this looks good:
> > Reviewed-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > > + for (i = 0; i < NUM_FD; i++) {
> > > + sprintf(buffer_name, "Target buffer %d\n", i);
> > > + mfd[i] = drm_open_any();
> > > + mbufmgr[i] = drm_intel_bufmgr_gem_init(mfd[i], 4096);
> > > + igt_assert(mbufmgr[i]);
> > > + drm_intel_bufmgr_gem_enable_reuse(mbufmgr[i]);
> > > + mbatch[i] = intel_batchbuffer_alloc(mbufmgr[i], devid);
> > > + igt_assert(mbufmgr[i]);
> > > + mbuffer[i] = intel_bo_gem_create_from_name(
> > > + mbufmgr[i],
> > > + buffer_name,
> > > + target_flink);
> > > + igt_assert(mbuffer[i]);
> > > + }
> > > + }
> > > }
> > >
> > > igt_subtest("render") {
> > > @@ -190,8 +271,27 @@ igt_main
> > > printf("dummy loop run on random rings completed\n");
> > > }
> > > }
> > > -
> > > + igt_subtest("mixed_multi_fd") {
> > > + if (num_rings > 1) {
> > > + sleep(2);
> > > + printf("running dummy loop on random rings based on "
> > > + "multi drm_fd\n");
> > > + dummy_reloc_loop_random_ring_multi_fd(num_rings);
> > > + printf("dummy loop run on random rings based on "
> > > + "multi drm_fd completed\n");
> > > + }
> > > + }
> > > igt_fixture {
> > > + int i;
> > > + /* Free the buffer/batchbuffer/buffer mgr for multi-fd */
> > > + {
> > > + for (i = 0; i < NUM_FD; i++) {
> > > + dri_bo_unreference(mbuffer[i]);
> > > + intel_batchbuffer_free(mbatch[i]);
> > > + drm_intel_bufmgr_destroy(mbufmgr[i]);
> > > + close(mfd[i]);
> > > + }
> > > + }
> > > drm_intel_bo_unreference(target_buffer);
> > > intel_batchbuffer_free(batch);
> > > drm_intel_bufmgr_destroy(bufmgr);
> >
>
>
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Intel-gfx mailing list
> > Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
>
>
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
