On 22/05/2018 12:00, Chris Wilson wrote:
While for stressing the system we want to submit as many batches as we
can as that shows us worst case impact on system latency, it is not a
very realistic case. To introduce a bit more realism allow the batches
run for a user defined duration.
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
---
  benchmarks/gem_syslatency.c | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
  1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/benchmarks/gem_syslatency.c b/benchmarks/gem_syslatency.c
index d1056773a..45cabe86c 100644
--- a/benchmarks/gem_syslatency.c
+++ b/benchmarks/gem_syslatency.c
@@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ static volatile int done;
struct gem_busyspin {
        pthread_t thread;
+       unsigned long sz;
        unsigned long count;
        bool leak;
        bool interrupts;
@@ -96,7 +97,8 @@ static void *gem_busyspin(void *arg)
        struct gem_busyspin *bs = arg;
        struct drm_i915_gem_execbuffer2 execbuf;
        struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 obj[2];
-       const unsigned sz = bs->leak ? 16 << 20 : 4 << 10;
+       const unsigned sz =
+               bs->sz ? bs->sz + sizeof(bbe) : bs->leak ? 16 << 20 : 4 << 10;
        unsigned engines[16];
        unsigned nengine;
        unsigned engine;
@@ -112,7 +114,7 @@ static void *gem_busyspin(void *arg)
        obj[0].handle = gem_create(fd, 4096);
        obj[0].flags = EXEC_OBJECT_WRITE;
        obj[1].handle = gem_create(fd, sz);
-       gem_write(fd, obj[1].handle, 0, &bbe, sizeof(bbe));
+       gem_write(fd, obj[1].handle, bs->sz, &bbe, sizeof(bbe));

Hm what was the point in creating large batches here if bbend was always first?

memset(&execbuf, 0, sizeof(execbuf));
        execbuf.buffers_ptr = (uintptr_t)(obj + !bs->interrupts);
@@ -125,6 +127,12 @@ static void *gem_busyspin(void *arg)
        }
while (!done) {
+               for (int n = 0; n < nengine; n++) {
+                       const int m = rand() % nengine;
+                       unsigned int tmp = engines[n];
+                       engines[n] = engines[m];
+                       engines[m] = tmp;

igt_exchange_int? Problem with frameworks getting more featureful is easier to forget what is there. :) Or even igt_permute_array?

But what it has to do with batch duration?

+               }
                for (int n = 0; n < nengine; n++) {
                        execbuf.flags &= ~ENGINE_FLAGS;
                        execbuf.flags |= engines[n];
@@ -134,7 +142,7 @@ static void *gem_busyspin(void *arg)
                if (bs->leak) {
                        gem_madvise(fd, obj[1].handle, I915_MADV_DONTNEED);
                        obj[1].handle = gem_create(fd, sz);
-                       gem_write(fd, obj[1].handle, 0, &bbe, sizeof(bbe));
+                       gem_write(fd, obj[1].handle, bs->sz, &bbe, sizeof(bbe));
                }
        }
@@ -294,6 +302,50 @@ static void *background_fs(void *path)
        return NULL;
  }
+static unsigned long calibrate_nop(unsigned int target_us,
+                                  unsigned int tolerance_pct)
+{
+       const uint32_t bbe = MI_BATCH_BUFFER_END;
+       const unsigned int loops = 100;
+       struct drm_i915_gem_exec_object2 obj = {};
+       struct drm_i915_gem_execbuffer2 eb =
+               { .buffer_count = 1, .buffers_ptr = (uintptr_t)&obj};
+       struct timespec t_0, t_end;
+       long sz, prev;
+       int fd;
+
+       fd = drm_open_driver(DRIVER_INTEL);
+
+       clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &t_0);
+
+       sz = 256 * 1024;
+       do {
+               struct timespec t_start;
+
+               obj.handle = gem_create(fd, sz + sizeof(bbe));
+               gem_write(fd, obj.handle, sz, &bbe, sizeof(bbe));
+               gem_execbuf(fd, &eb);
+               gem_sync(fd, obj.handle);
+
+               clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &t_start);
+               for (int loop = 0; loop < loops; loop++)
+                       gem_execbuf(fd, &eb);
+               gem_sync(fd, obj.handle);
+               clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &t_end);
+
+               gem_close(fd, obj.handle);
+
+               prev = sz;
+               sz = loops * sz / elapsed(&t_start, &t_end) * 1e3 * target_us;
+               sz = ALIGN(sz, sizeof(uint32_t));
+       } while (elapsed(&t_0, &t_end) < 5 ||
+                abs(sz - prev) > (sz * tolerance_pct / 100));
+
+       close(fd);
+
+       return sz;
+}

I presume this is a copy&paste so don't have to look into it in detail.

+
  int main(int argc, char **argv)
  {
        struct gem_busyspin *busy;
@@ -309,9 +361,10 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
        int enable_gem_sysbusy = 1;
        bool leak = false;
        bool interrupts = false;
+       long batch = 0;
        int n, c;
- while ((c = getopt(argc, argv, "t:f:bmni1")) != -1) {
+       while ((c = getopt(argc, argv, "r:t:f:bmni1")) != -1) {
                switch (c) {
                case '1':
                        ncpus = 1;
@@ -328,6 +381,10 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
                        if (time < 0)
                                time = INT_MAX;
                        break;
+               case 'r':
+                       /* Duration of each batch (microseconds) */
+                       batch = atoi(optarg);
+                       break;
                case 'f':
                        /* Select an output field */
                        field = atoi(optarg);
@@ -350,11 +407,17 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
        force_low_latency();
        min = min_measurement_error();
+ if (batch > 0)
+               batch = calibrate_nop(batch, 2);
+       else
+               batch = -batch;
+

No idea of the purpose of this. User passes in negative on the cmd line? But then calibration is missing.

        busy = calloc(ncpus, sizeof(*busy));
        pthread_attr_init(&attr);
        if (enable_gem_sysbusy) {
                for (n = 0; n < ncpus; n++) {
                        bind_cpu(&attr, n);
+                       busy[n].sz = batch;
                        busy[n].leak = leak;
                        busy[n].interrupts = interrupts;
                        pthread_create(&busy[n].thread, &attr,


Regards,

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

Reply via email to