On 23/04/18 08:51, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Antonio Argenziano (2018-04-23 16:37:17)


On 23/04/18 06:43, Chris Wilson wrote:
In the existing ABI, each engine operates its own timeline
(fence.context) and so should execute independently of any other. If we
install a blocker on all other engines, that should not affect execution
on the local engine.

Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>

+static void independent(int fd, unsigned int engine)
+{
+     IGT_CORK_HANDLE(cork);
+     uint32_t scratch, plug, batch;
+     igt_spin_t *spin = NULL;
+     unsigned int other;
+     uint32_t *ptr;
+
+     igt_require(engine != 0);
+
+     scratch = gem_create(fd, 4096);
+     plug = igt_cork_plug(&cork, fd);
+
+     /* Check that we can submit to engine while all others are blocked */
+     for_each_physical_engine(fd, other) {
+             if (other == engine)
+                     continue;
+
+             if (spin == NULL) {
+                     spin = __igt_spin_batch_new(fd, 0, other, 0);
+             } else {
+                     struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 obj = {
+                             .handle = spin->handle,
+                     };
+                     struct drm_i915_gem_execbuffer2 eb = {
+                             .buffer_count = 1,
+                             .buffers_ptr = to_user_pointer(&obj),
+                             .flags = other,
+                     };
+                     gem_execbuf(fd, &eb);
+             }
+
+             store_dword(fd, 0, other, scratch, 0, other, plug, 0);
+     }
+     igt_require(spin);
+
+     /* Same priority, but different timeline (as different engine) */
+     batch = __store_dword(fd, 0, engine, scratch, 0, engine, plug, 0);

It would be interesting to check that priority scheduling/preemption is
still happening on the free engine.

It's being run on machines without scheduling as well. Reordering tests
are later; not sure if I care about reordering while blocking, that's an
entirely different set of tests being worked on for queues.

Cool, a different set of tests is what I had in mind as well :).

Oh BTW, with the igt_require in the subtests this is:

Reviewed-by: Antonio Argenziano <antonio.argenzi...@intel.com>

Thanks,
Antonio

-Chris

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Reply via email to