Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] i915_pm_freq_api: Add some debug to tests

2023-07-17 Thread Belgaumkar, Vinay 



On 7/8/2023 12:36 PM, Dixit, Ashutosh wrote:

On Fri, 07 Jul 2023 16:23:59 -0700, Vinay Belgaumkar wrote:

Some subtests seem to be failing in CI, use igt_assert_(lt/eq) which
print the values being compared and some additional debug as well.

Signed-off-by: Vinay Belgaumkar 
---
  tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c | 18 --
  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c b/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
index 522abee35..cdb2e70ca 100644
--- a/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
+++ b/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
@@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ static void test_freq_basic_api(int dirfd, int gt)
rpn = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RPn_FREQ_MHZ);
rp0 = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RP0_FREQ_MHZ);
rpe = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RP1_FREQ_MHZ);
+   igt_debug("RPn: %d, RPe: %d, RP0: %d", rpn, rpe, rp0);

Print gt here too.

ok.



/*
 * Negative bound tests
@@ -90,21 +91,18 @@ static void test_reset(int i915, int dirfd, int gt, int 
count)
int fd;

for (int i = 0; i < count; i++) {
-   igt_assert_f(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0,
-"Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
-   igt_assert_f(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0,
-"Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
+   igt_debug("Running cycle: %d", i);
+   igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
+   igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
usleep(ACT_FREQ_LATENCY_US);
-   igt_assert_f(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn,
-"Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
+   igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);

/* Manually trigger a GT reset */
fd = igt_debugfs_gt_open(i915, gt, "reset", O_WRONLY);
igt_require(fd >= 0);
igt_ignore_warn(write(fd, "1\n", 2));

-   igt_assert_f(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn,
-"Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
+   igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);

Probably ok but why the changes in this loop?


There are a couple of bugs that are failing around this area.

Thanks,

Vinay.




}
close(fd);
  }
@@ -116,13 +114,13 @@ static void test_suspend(int i915, int dirfd, int gt)
igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
usleep(ACT_FREQ_LATENCY_US);
-   igt_assert(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn);
+   igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);

/* Manually trigger a suspend */
igt_system_suspend_autoresume(SUSPEND_STATE_S3,
  SUSPEND_TEST_NONE);

-   igt_assert(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn);
+   igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
  }

  int i915 = -1;
--
2.38.1

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] i915_pm_freq_api: Add some debug to tests

2023-07-08 Thread Dixit, Ashutosh 
On Fri, 07 Jul 2023 16:23:59 -0700, Vinay Belgaumkar wrote:
>
> Some subtests seem to be failing in CI, use igt_assert_(lt/eq) which
> print the values being compared and some additional debug as well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vinay Belgaumkar 
> ---
>  tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c | 18 --
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c b/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
> index 522abee35..cdb2e70ca 100644
> --- a/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
> +++ b/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
> @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ static void test_freq_basic_api(int dirfd, int gt)
>   rpn = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RPn_FREQ_MHZ);
>   rp0 = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RP0_FREQ_MHZ);
>   rpe = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RP1_FREQ_MHZ);
> + igt_debug("RPn: %d, RPe: %d, RP0: %d", rpn, rpe, rp0);

Print gt here too.

>
>   /*
>* Negative bound tests
> @@ -90,21 +91,18 @@ static void test_reset(int i915, int dirfd, int gt, int 
> count)
>   int fd;
>
>   for (int i = 0; i < count; i++) {
> - igt_assert_f(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0,
> -  "Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
> - igt_assert_f(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0,
> -  "Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
> + igt_debug("Running cycle: %d", i);
> + igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
> + igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
>   usleep(ACT_FREQ_LATENCY_US);
> - igt_assert_f(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn,
> -  "Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
> + igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
>
>   /* Manually trigger a GT reset */
>   fd = igt_debugfs_gt_open(i915, gt, "reset", O_WRONLY);
>   igt_require(fd >= 0);
>   igt_ignore_warn(write(fd, "1\n", 2));
>
> - igt_assert_f(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn,
> -  "Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
> + igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);

Probably ok but why the changes in this loop?

>   }
>   close(fd);
>  }
> @@ -116,13 +114,13 @@ static void test_suspend(int i915, int dirfd, int gt)
>   igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
>   igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
>   usleep(ACT_FREQ_LATENCY_US);
> - igt_assert(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn);
> + igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
>
>   /* Manually trigger a suspend */
>   igt_system_suspend_autoresume(SUSPEND_STATE_S3,
> SUSPEND_TEST_NONE);
>
> - igt_assert(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn);
> + igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
>  }
>
>  int i915 = -1;
> --
> 2.38.1
>

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t] i915_pm_freq_api: Add some debug to tests

2023-07-07 Thread Vinay Belgaumkar 
Some subtests seem to be failing in CI, use igt_assert_(lt/eq) which
print the values being compared and some additional debug as well.

Signed-off-by: Vinay Belgaumkar 
---
 tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c | 18 --
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c b/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
index 522abee35..cdb2e70ca 100644
--- a/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
+++ b/tests/i915/i915_pm_freq_api.c
@@ -55,6 +55,7 @@ static void test_freq_basic_api(int dirfd, int gt)
rpn = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RPn_FREQ_MHZ);
rp0 = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RP0_FREQ_MHZ);
rpe = get_freq(dirfd, RPS_RP1_FREQ_MHZ);
+   igt_debug("RPn: %d, RPe: %d, RP0: %d", rpn, rpe, rp0);
 
/*
 * Negative bound tests
@@ -90,21 +91,18 @@ static void test_reset(int i915, int dirfd, int gt, int 
count)
int fd;
 
for (int i = 0; i < count; i++) {
-   igt_assert_f(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0,
-"Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
-   igt_assert_f(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0,
-"Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
+   igt_debug("Running cycle: %d", i);
+   igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
+   igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
usleep(ACT_FREQ_LATENCY_US);
-   igt_assert_f(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn,
-"Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
+   igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
 
/* Manually trigger a GT reset */
fd = igt_debugfs_gt_open(i915, gt, "reset", O_WRONLY);
igt_require(fd >= 0);
igt_ignore_warn(write(fd, "1\n", 2));
 
-   igt_assert_f(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn,
-"Failed after %d good cycles\n", i);
+   igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
}
close(fd);
 }
@@ -116,13 +114,13 @@ static void test_suspend(int i915, int dirfd, int gt)
igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MIN_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
igt_assert(set_freq(dirfd, RPS_MAX_FREQ_MHZ, rpn) > 0);
usleep(ACT_FREQ_LATENCY_US);
-   igt_assert(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn);
+   igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
 
/* Manually trigger a suspend */
igt_system_suspend_autoresume(SUSPEND_STATE_S3,
  SUSPEND_TEST_NONE);
 
-   igt_assert(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ) == rpn);
+   igt_assert_eq(get_freq(dirfd, RPS_CUR_FREQ_MHZ), rpn);
 }
 
 int i915 = -1;
-- 
2.38.1