On 18/09/17 20:53, Matthew Auld wrote:
On 08/31, Lionel Landwerlin wrote:
New issues that were discovered while making the tests work on Gen8+ :

  - we need to measure timings between periodic reports and discard all
    other kind of reports

  - it seems periodicity of the reports can be affected outside of RC6
    (frequency change), we can detect this by looking at the amount of
    clock cycles per timestamp deltas

v2: Drop some unused variables (Matthew)

Signed-off-by: Lionel Landwerlin <[email protected]>
---
<SNIP>

+
+static uint32_t
+i915_get_one_gpu_timestamp(uint32_t *context_id)
+{
+       drm_intel_bufmgr *bufmgr = drm_intel_bufmgr_gem_init(drm_fd, 4096);
+       drm_intel_context *mi_rpc_ctx = drm_intel_gem_context_create(bufmgr);
+       drm_intel_bo *mi_rpc_bo = drm_intel_bo_alloc(bufmgr, "mi_rpc dest bo", 
4096, 64);
alignment=64 ?

+       struct intel_batchbuffer *mi_rpc_batch = 
intel_batchbuffer_alloc(bufmgr, devid);
+       int ret;
+       uint32_t timestamp;
+
+       drm_intel_bufmgr_gem_enable_reuse(bufmgr);
+
+       if (context_id) {
+               ret = drm_intel_gem_context_get_id(mi_rpc_ctx, context_id);
+               igt_assert_eq(ret, 0);
+       }
+
+       igt_assert(mi_rpc_ctx);
+       igt_assert(mi_rpc_bo);
+       igt_assert(mi_rpc_batch);
+
+       ret = drm_intel_bo_map(mi_rpc_bo, true);
+       igt_assert_eq(ret, 0);
+       memset(mi_rpc_bo->virtual, 0x80, 4096);
+       drm_intel_bo_unmap(mi_rpc_bo);
+
+       emit_report_perf_count(mi_rpc_batch,
+                              mi_rpc_bo, /* dst */
+                              0, /* dst offset in bytes */
+                              0xdeadbeef); /* report ID */
+
+       intel_batchbuffer_flush_with_context(mi_rpc_batch, mi_rpc_ctx);
+
+       ret = drm_intel_bo_map(mi_rpc_bo, false /* write enable */);
+       igt_assert_eq(ret, 0);
+       timestamp = ((uint32_t *)mi_rpc_bo->virtual)[1];
+       drm_intel_bo_unmap(mi_rpc_bo);
+
+       drm_intel_bo_unreference(mi_rpc_bo);
+       intel_batchbuffer_free(mi_rpc_batch);
+       drm_intel_gem_context_destroy(mi_rpc_ctx);
+       drm_intel_bufmgr_destroy(bufmgr);
+
+       return timestamp;
+}
static void
  hsw_sanity_check_render_basic_reports(uint32_t *oa_report0, uint32_t 
*oa_report1,
@@ -1050,7 +1206,6 @@ i915_read_reports_until_timestamp(enum drm_i915_oa_format 
oa_format,
        return total_len;
  }
-
  /* CAP_SYS_ADMIN is required to open system wide metrics, unless the system
   * control parameter dev.i915.perf_stream_paranoid == 0 */
  static void
@@ -1365,20 +1520,6 @@ open_and_read_2_oa_reports(int format_id,
        __perf_close(stream_fd);
  }
-static void
-gen8_read_report_clock_ratios(uint32_t *report,
-                             uint32_t *slice_freq_mhz,
-                             uint32_t *unslice_freq_mhz)
-{
-       uint32_t unslice_freq = report[0] & 0x1ff;
-       uint32_t slice_freq_low = (report[0] >> 25) & 0x7f;
-       uint32_t slice_freq_high = (report[0] >> 9) & 0x3;
-       uint32_t slice_freq = slice_freq_low | (slice_freq_high << 7);
-
-       *slice_freq_mhz = (slice_freq * 16666) / 1000;
-       *unslice_freq_mhz = (unslice_freq * 16666) / 1000;
-}
-
  static void
  print_reports(uint32_t *oa_report0, uint32_t *oa_report1, int fmt)
  {
@@ -1570,74 +1711,456 @@ test_oa_formats(void)
        }
  }
+
+enum load {
+       LOW,
+       HIGH
+};
+
+#define LOAD_HELPER_PAUSE_USEC 500
+
+static struct load_helper {
+       int devid;
+       int has_ppgtt;
+       drm_intel_bufmgr *bufmgr;
+       drm_intel_context *context;
+       uint32_t context_id;
+       struct intel_batchbuffer *batch;
+       enum load load;
+       bool exit;
+       struct igt_helper_process igt_proc;
+       struct igt_buf src, dst;
+} lh = { 0, };
We can drop the initialisation since this is static.

+
+static void load_helper_signal_handler(int sig)
+{
+       if (sig == SIGUSR2)
+               lh.load = lh.load == LOW ? HIGH : LOW;
+       else
+               lh.exit = true;
+}
+
+static void load_helper_set_load(enum load load)
+{
+       igt_assert(lh.igt_proc.running);
+
+       if (lh.load == load)
+               return;
+
+       lh.load = load;
+       kill(lh.igt_proc.pid, SIGUSR2);
+}
+
+static void load_helper_run(enum load load)
+{
+       /*
+        * FIXME fork helpers won't get cleaned up when started from within a
+        * subtest, so handle the case where it sticks around a bit too long.
+        */
+       if (lh.igt_proc.running) {
+               load_helper_set_load(load);
+               return;
+       }
+
+       lh.load = load;
+
+       igt_fork_helper(&lh.igt_proc) {
+               signal(SIGUSR1, load_helper_signal_handler);
+               signal(SIGUSR2, load_helper_signal_handler);
+
+               while (!lh.exit) {
+                       int ret;
+
+                       render_copy(lh.batch,
+                                   lh.context,
+                                   &lh.src, 0, 0, 1920, 1080,
+                                   &lh.dst, 0, 0);
+
+                       intel_batchbuffer_flush_with_context(lh.batch,
+                                                            lh.context);
+
+                       ret = drm_intel_gem_context_get_id(lh.context,
+                                                          &lh.context_id);
+                       igt_assert_eq(ret, 0);
+
+                       drm_intel_bo_wait_rendering(lh.dst.bo);
+
+                       /* Lower the load by pausing after every submitted
+                        * write. */
+                       if (lh.load == LOW)
+                               usleep(LOAD_HELPER_PAUSE_USEC);
+               }
+       }
+}
+
+static void load_helper_stop(void)
+{
+       kill(lh.igt_proc.pid, SIGUSR1);
+       igt_assert(igt_wait_helper(&lh.igt_proc) == 0);
+}
+
+static void load_helper_init(void)
+{
+       int ret;
+
+       lh.devid = intel_get_drm_devid(drm_fd);
+       lh.has_ppgtt = gem_uses_ppgtt(drm_fd);
+
+       /* MI_STORE_DATA can only use GTT address on gen4+/g33 and needs
+        * snoopable mem on pre-gen6. Hence load-helper only works on gen6+, but
+        * that's also all we care about for the rps testcase*/
+       igt_assert(intel_gen(lh.devid) >= 6);
+       lh.bufmgr = drm_intel_bufmgr_gem_init(drm_fd, 4096);
+       igt_assert(lh.bufmgr);
+
+       drm_intel_bufmgr_gem_enable_reuse(lh.bufmgr);
+
+       lh.context = drm_intel_gem_context_create(lh.bufmgr);
+       igt_assert(lh.context);
+
+       lh.context_id = 0xffffffff;
+       ret = drm_intel_gem_context_get_id(lh.context, &lh.context_id);
+       igt_assert_eq(ret, 0);
+       igt_assert_neq(lh.context_id, 0xffffffff);
+
+       lh.batch = intel_batchbuffer_alloc(lh.bufmgr, lh.devid);
+       igt_assert(lh.batch);
+
+       scratch_buf_init(lh.bufmgr, &lh.dst, 1920, 1080, 0);
+       scratch_buf_init(lh.bufmgr, &lh.src, 1920, 1080, 0);
+}
+
+static void load_helper_fini(void)
+{
+       if (lh.igt_proc.running)
+               load_helper_stop();
+
+       if (lh.src.bo)
+               drm_intel_bo_unreference(lh.src.bo);
+       if (lh.dst.bo)
+               drm_intel_bo_unreference(lh.dst.bo);
+
+       if (lh.batch)
+               intel_batchbuffer_free(lh.batch);
+
+       if (lh.context)
+               drm_intel_gem_context_destroy(lh.context);
+
+       if (lh.bufmgr)
+               drm_intel_bufmgr_destroy(lh.bufmgr);
+}
+
  static void
  test_oa_exponents(void)
  {
-       igt_debug("Testing OA timer exponents\n");
+       load_helper_init();
+       load_helper_run(HIGH);
/* It's asking a lot to sample with a 160 nanosecond period and the
         * test can fail due to buffer overflows if it wasn't possible to
         * keep up, so we don't start from an exponent of zero...
         */
-       for (int i = 5; i < 20; i++) {
-               uint32_t expected_timestamp_delta;
-               uint32_t timestamp_delta;
-               uint32_t oa_report0[64];
-               uint32_t oa_report1[64];
+       for (int exponent = 5; exponent < 18; exponent++) {
Why the change from 20 -> 18?

It basically divides the amount of time we need to run that test by 4 :)


Otherwise looks okay:
Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld <[email protected]>



_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to