On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 12:24:19PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 01:19:09PM +0200, Michał Winiarski wrote: >> > When reading the timestamp register with single 64b read, we are observing >> > invalid values on x86_64: >> > >> > [f = valid counter value | X = garbage] >> > >> > i386: 0x0000000fffffffff >> > x86_64: 0xffffffffXXXXXXXX >> > >> > Test checks if the counter is moving and increasing. >> > Add a check to see if we can use (reg | 1) flag to get a proper 36b timestamp, >> > shifting the value on x86_64 if we can't. >> > >> > v2: More iterations of monotonic test, comments, minor fixups (Chris) >> > v3: Skip tests if reg_read is not supported >> > >> > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Signed-off-by: Michał Winiarski <michal.winiarski@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> Lgtm, >> Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Pushed! thanks for the patch and review. This is a testcase for new abi and the kernel side hasn't landed yet. Intentional breach of procedures? -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
