Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v3 5/6] tests/gem_scheduler: Add subtests to test batch priority behaviour
> > >-Original Message- >From: Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele >Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 8:58 AM >To: Morton, Derek J ; intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org >Subject: Re: [PATCH i-g-t v3 5/6] tests/gem_scheduler: Add subtests to test >batch priority behaviour > > > >On 10/03/16 11:03, 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. >> >> v2: Addressed review comments from Daniele Ceraolo Spurio >> >> Signed-off-by: Derek Morton >> --- >> tests/gem_scheduler.c | 53 >> +++ >> 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tests/gem_scheduler.c b/tests/gem_scheduler.c index >> 436440a..126ee97 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 " >> @@ -136,11 +137,23 @@ static void init_context(int *fd, drm_intel_bufmgr >> **bufmgr, int ringid) >> intel_batchbuffer_free(noop_bb); >> } >> >> -/* Basic test. Check batch buffers of the same priority and with no >> dependencies >> - * are executed in the order they are submitted. >> +static void set_priority(int fd, int value) { >> +struct local_i915_gem_context_param param; >> +param.context = 0; /* Default context */ >> +param.size = 0; >> +param.param = LOCAL_CONTEXT_PARAM_PRIORITY; >> +param.value = (uint64_t)value; >> +gem_context_set_param(fd, ¶m); >> +} >> + >> +/* If 'priority' is 0, check batch buffers of the same priority and >> +with >> + * no dependencies are executed in the order they are submitted. >> + * If 'priority' is set !0, 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, int priority) >> { >> int fd[NBR_BASIC_FDs]; >> int loop; >> @@ -160,6 +173,13 @@ static void run_test_basic(int in_flight, int ringid) >> for(loop=0; loop < NBR_BASIC_FDs; loop++) >> init_context(&(fd[loop]), &(bufmgr[loop]), ringid); >> >> +/* For high priority set priority of second context to overtake first >> + * For low priority set priority of first context to be overtaxen by >> second >> + */ >> +if(priority > 0) >> +set_priority(fd[2], priority); >> +else if(priority < 0) >> +set_priority(fd[1], priority); >> >> /* Create buffer objects */ >> delay_bo = create_and_check_bo(bufmgr[0], "delay bo"); @@ -209,9 >> +229,14 @@ 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]), >> - "TS1 ts (0x%08" PRIx32 ") > TS2 ts (0x%08" PRIx32 ")\n", >> - 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]); >> >> /* Cleanup */ >> for(loop = 0; loop < in_flight; loop++) @@ -438,7 +463,19 @@ >> igt_main >> for (loop=0; loop < NBR_RINGS; loop++) >> igt_subtest_f("%s-basic", rings[loop].name) { >> gem_require_ring(fd, rings[loop].id); >> -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-high", rings[loop].name) { >> +gem_require_ring(fd, rings[loop].id); >> +run_test_basic(in_flight, rings[loop].id, 1000); > >1000 is a very high pri
Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v3 5/6] tests/gem_scheduler: Add subtests to test batch priority behaviour
On 10/03/16 11:03, 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. v2: Addressed review comments from Daniele Ceraolo Spurio Signed-off-by: Derek Morton --- tests/gem_scheduler.c | 53 +++ 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/gem_scheduler.c b/tests/gem_scheduler.c index 436440a..126ee97 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 " @@ -136,11 +137,23 @@ static void init_context(int *fd, drm_intel_bufmgr **bufmgr, int ringid) intel_batchbuffer_free(noop_bb); } -/* Basic test. Check batch buffers of the same priority and with no dependencies - * are executed in the order they are submitted. +static void set_priority(int fd, int value) +{ + struct local_i915_gem_context_param param; + param.context = 0; /* Default context */ + param.size = 0; + param.param = LOCAL_CONTEXT_PARAM_PRIORITY; + param.value = (uint64_t)value; + gem_context_set_param(fd, ¶m); +} + +/* If 'priority' is 0, check batch buffers of the same priority and with + * no dependencies are executed in the order they are submitted. + * If 'priority' is set !0, 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, int priority) { int fd[NBR_BASIC_FDs]; int loop; @@ -160,6 +173,13 @@ static void run_test_basic(int in_flight, int ringid) for(loop=0; loop < NBR_BASIC_FDs; loop++) init_context(&(fd[loop]), &(bufmgr[loop]), ringid); + /* For high priority set priority of second context to overtake first +* For low priority set priority of first context to be overtaxen by second +*/ + if(priority > 0) + set_priority(fd[2], priority); + else if(priority < 0) + set_priority(fd[1], priority); /* Create buffer objects */ delay_bo = create_and_check_bo(bufmgr[0], "delay bo"); @@ -209,9 +229,14 @@ 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]), -"TS1 ts (0x%08" PRIx32 ") > TS2 ts (0x%08" PRIx32 ")\n", -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]); /* Cleanup */ for(loop = 0; loop < in_flight; loop++) @@ -438,7 +463,19 @@ igt_main for (loop=0; loop < NBR_RINGS; loop++) igt_subtest_f("%s-basic", rings[loop].name) { gem_require_ring(fd, rings[loop].id); - 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-high", rings[loop].name) { + gem_require_ring(fd, rings[loop].id); + run_test_basic(in_flight, rings[loop].id, 1000); 1000 is a very high priority and it could cause a preemption (when the support lands). That shouldn't fail the test because the second batch will still overtake the first one but we might end up testing a different scenario that the one we're trying to test here, so we could use a smaller priority value here and use 1000+ in future preemption specific tests. Regards, Daniele + } + + for (loop=0; loop < NBR_RINGS; loop++) + igt_subtest_f("%s-priority
[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t v3 5/6] tests/gem_scheduler: Add subtests to test batch priority behaviour
Add subtests to test each ring to check batch buffers of a higher priority will be executed before batch buffers of a lower priority. v2: Addressed review comments from Daniele Ceraolo Spurio Signed-off-by: Derek Morton --- tests/gem_scheduler.c | 53 +++ 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/tests/gem_scheduler.c b/tests/gem_scheduler.c index 436440a..126ee97 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 " @@ -136,11 +137,23 @@ static void init_context(int *fd, drm_intel_bufmgr **bufmgr, int ringid) intel_batchbuffer_free(noop_bb); } -/* Basic test. Check batch buffers of the same priority and with no dependencies - * are executed in the order they are submitted. +static void set_priority(int fd, int value) +{ + struct local_i915_gem_context_param param; + param.context = 0; /* Default context */ + param.size = 0; + param.param = LOCAL_CONTEXT_PARAM_PRIORITY; + param.value = (uint64_t)value; + gem_context_set_param(fd, ¶m); +} + +/* If 'priority' is 0, check batch buffers of the same priority and with + * no dependencies are executed in the order they are submitted. + * If 'priority' is set !0, 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, int priority) { int fd[NBR_BASIC_FDs]; int loop; @@ -160,6 +173,13 @@ static void run_test_basic(int in_flight, int ringid) for(loop=0; loop < NBR_BASIC_FDs; loop++) init_context(&(fd[loop]), &(bufmgr[loop]), ringid); + /* For high priority set priority of second context to overtake first +* For low priority set priority of first context to be overtaxen by second +*/ + if(priority > 0) + set_priority(fd[2], priority); + else if(priority < 0) + set_priority(fd[1], priority); /* Create buffer objects */ delay_bo = create_and_check_bo(bufmgr[0], "delay bo"); @@ -209,9 +229,14 @@ 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]), -"TS1 ts (0x%08" PRIx32 ") > TS2 ts (0x%08" PRIx32 ")\n", -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]); /* Cleanup */ for(loop = 0; loop < in_flight; loop++) @@ -438,7 +463,19 @@ igt_main for (loop=0; loop < NBR_RINGS; loop++) igt_subtest_f("%s-basic", rings[loop].name) { gem_require_ring(fd, rings[loop].id); - 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-high", rings[loop].name) { + gem_require_ring(fd, rings[loop].id); + run_test_basic(in_flight, rings[loop].id, 1000); + } + + for (loop=0; loop < NBR_RINGS; loop++) + igt_subtest_f("%s-priority-low", rings[loop].name) { + gem_require_ring(fd, rings[loop].id); + run_test_basic(in_flight, rings[loop].id, -1000); } for (loop=0; loop < NBR_RINGS; loop++) -- 1.9.1 ___ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx