Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt/gem_workarounds: igt to test workaround registers

2014-08-30 Thread Damien Lespiau
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 02:50:28PM +0100, Arun Siluvery wrote: + igt_subtest(check-workaround-data-after-suspend-resume) { + if (IS_BROADWELL(devid)) + check_workarounds(SUSPEND_RESUME, num_wa_regs); + else + igt_skip_on(No

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt/gem_workarounds: igt to test workaround registers

2014-08-30 Thread Damien Lespiau
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 02:50:28PM +0100, Arun Siluvery wrote: + igt_fixture { [...] + + fd = igt_debugfs_open(intel_wa_registers, O_RDONLY); + igt_assert(fd = 0); This will make the test fail on kernels that don't have your kernel work exposing that debugfs

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt/gem_workarounds: igt to test workaround registers

2014-08-28 Thread Damien Lespiau
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 06:55:37AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 11:30:35PM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote: On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 06:52:57PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: Just to clarify, he was not ok because the list we maintain in the test can get out of sync with

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt/gem_workarounds: igt to test workaround registers

2014-08-27 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 02:50:28PM +0100, Arun Siluvery wrote: Some of the workarounds are lost followed by a gpu reset, suspend/resume; this patch adds a test which compares register state before and after the test scenario. This test currently verifies only bdw workarounds. v2: address

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt/gem_workarounds: igt to test workaround registers

2014-08-27 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 05:50:16PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 02:50:28PM +0100, Arun Siluvery wrote: Some of the workarounds are lost followed by a gpu reset, suspend/resume; this patch adds a test which compares register state before and after the test scenario.

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt/gem_workarounds: igt to test workaround registers

2014-08-27 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 05:17:11PM +0100, Siluvery, Arun wrote: On 27/08/2014 16:59, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 05:50:16PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 02:50:28PM +0100, Arun Siluvery wrote: Some of the workarounds are lost followed by a gpu reset,

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt/gem_workarounds: igt to test workaround registers

2014-08-27 Thread Siluvery, Arun
On 27/08/2014 16:59, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 05:50:16PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 02:50:28PM +0100, Arun Siluvery wrote: Some of the workarounds are lost followed by a gpu reset, suspend/resume; this patch adds a test which compares register state

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt/gem_workarounds: igt to test workaround registers

2014-08-27 Thread Siluvery, Arun
On 27/08/2014 17:23, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 05:17:11PM +0100, Siluvery, Arun wrote: On 27/08/2014 16:59, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 05:50:16PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 02:50:28PM +0100, Arun Siluvery wrote: Some of the

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt/gem_workarounds: igt to test workaround registers

2014-08-27 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 06:02:15PM +0100, Siluvery, Arun wrote: On 27/08/2014 17:23, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 05:17:11PM +0100, Siluvery, Arun wrote: On 27/08/2014 16:59, Chris Wilson wrote: On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 05:50:16PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: On Tue, Aug 26, 2014

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt/gem_workarounds: igt to test workaround registers

2014-08-27 Thread Damien Lespiau
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 06:52:57PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: Just to clarify, he was not ok because the list we maintain in the test can get out of sync with the workarounds we apply in the driver which can be avoided if it is generated by the kernel itself. Test driven development would

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt/gem_workarounds: igt to test workaround registers

2014-08-27 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 11:30:35PM +0100, Damien Lespiau wrote: On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 06:52:57PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: Just to clarify, he was not ok because the list we maintain in the test can get out of sync with the workarounds we apply in the driver which can be avoided if it

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt/gem_workarounds: igt to test workaround registers

2014-08-26 Thread Arun Siluvery
Some of the workarounds are lost followed by a gpu reset, suspend/resume; this patch adds a test which compares register state before and after the test scenario. This test currently verifies only bdw workarounds. v2: address patch cleanup comments (ThomasW) Add binary to ignore list and use

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] igt/gem_workarounds: igt to test workaround registers

2014-08-22 Thread Arun Siluvery
Some of the workarounds are lost followed by a gpu reset, suspend/resume; this patch adds a test which compares register state before and after the test scenario. This test currently verifies only bdw workarounds. v2: address patch cleanup comments (ThomasW) Add binary to ignore list and use