-----Original Message-----
From: Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 1:10 PM
To: Morton, Derek J <derek.j.mor...@intel.com>; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 4/4] tests/gem_scheduler: Add subtests to
test batch priority behaviour
On 12/02/16 09:38, Derek Morton wrote:
> Add subtests to test each ring to check batch buffers of a higher
> priority will be executed before batch buffers of a lower priority.
>
> Signed-off-by: Derek Morton <derek.j.mor...@intel.com>
> ---
> tests/gem_scheduler.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/gem_scheduler.c b/tests/gem_scheduler.c index
> 4824c13..febde01 100644
> --- a/tests/gem_scheduler.c
> +++ b/tests/gem_scheduler.c
> @@ -39,7 +39,8 @@
>
> IGT_TEST_DESCRIPTION("Check scheduler behaviour. Basic tests ensure
> independant "
> "batch buffers of the same priority are executed in "
> - "submission order. Read-read tests ensure "
> + "submission order. Priority tests ensure higher
> priority "
> + "batch buffers are executed first. Read-read tests
> ensure "
> "batch buffers with a read dependency to the same
> buffer "
> "object do not block each other. Write-write
> dependency "
> "tests ensure batch buffers with a write dependency to
> a "
> @@ -61,11 +62,13 @@ struct ring {
>
> #define NBR_RINGS (sizeof(rings)/sizeof(struct ring))
>
> -/* Basic test. Check batch buffers of the same priority and with no
> dependencies
> - * are executed in the order they are submitted.
> +/* If 'priority' is set false, check batch buffers of the same
> +priority and with
> + * no dependencies are executed in the order they are submitted.
> + * If 'priority' is set true, check batch buffers of higher priority
> +are
> + * executed before batch buffers of lower priority.
> */
> #define NBR_BASIC_FDs (3)
> -static void run_test_basic(int in_flight, int ringid)
> +static void run_test_basic(int in_flight, int ringid, bool priority)
> {
> int fd[NBR_BASIC_FDs];
> int loop;
> @@ -95,6 +98,15 @@ static void run_test_basic(int in_flight, int ringid)
> intel_batchbuffer_free(noop_bb);
> }
>
> + if(priority) {
> + struct local_i915_gem_context_param param;
> + param.context = 0; /* Default context */
> + param.size = 0;
> + param.param = LOCAL_CONTEXT_PARAM_PRIORITY;
> + param.value = 1000;
> + gem_context_set_param(fd[2], ¶m);
It would be nice to repeat the test lowering the priority of the default ctx of
fd[1] instead of increasing the priority of the default ctx of fd[2]. Maybe we
could pass the priority value instead of a bool as parameter in the function
and have 3 possible behaviors based on the value (0, positive, negative)
I will change from a bool to an int to pass in the priority. If it is <0 apply
to fd[1] instead of fd[2] and add a test to lower priority.
Regards,
Daniele
> + }
> +
> /* Create buffer objects */
> delay_bo = drm_intel_bo_alloc(bufmgr[0], "delay bo", BATCH_SZ,
> BATCH_SZ);
> igt_assert(delay_bo);
> @@ -146,7 +158,12 @@ static void run_test_basic(int in_flight, int ringid)
> igt_assert_f(igt_compare_timestamps(delay_buf[2], ts1_buf[0]),
> "Delay ts (0x%08" PRIx32 ") > TS1 ts (0x%08" PRIx32 ")\n",
> delay_buf[2], ts1_buf[0]);
> - igt_assert_f(igt_compare_timestamps(ts1_buf[0], ts2_buf[0]),
> + if(priority)
> + igt_assert_f(igt_compare_timestamps(ts2_buf[0], ts1_buf[0]),
> + "TS2 ts (0x%08" PRIx32 ") > TS1 ts (0x%08" PRIx32
> ")\n",
> + ts2_buf[0], ts1_buf[0]);
> + else
> + igt_assert_f(igt_compare_timestamps(ts1_buf[0], ts2_buf[0]),
> "TS1 ts (0x%08" PRIx32 ") > TS2 ts (0x%08" PRIx32 ")\n",
> ts1_buf[0], ts2_buf[0]);
>
> @@ -393,7 +410,12 @@ igt_main
>
> for (loop=0; loop < NBR_RINGS; loop++)
> igt_subtest_f("%s-basic", rings[loop].name) {
> - run_test_basic(in_flight, rings[loop].id);
> + run_test_basic(in_flight, rings[loop].id, false);
> + }
> +
> + for (loop=0; loop < NBR_RINGS; loop++)
> + igt_subtest_f("%s-priority", rings[loop].name) {
> + run_test_basic(in_flight, rings[loop].id, true);
> }
>
> for (loop=0; loop < NBR_RINGS; loop++)
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
