On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 04:20:44PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Ring switches can occur many times per frame, and are often out of
> control, causing frequent RPS boosting for no practical benefit. Treat
> the sw semaphore synchronisation as a separate client and only allow it
> to boost once per busy/idle cycle.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 34 ++++++++++++++++++----------------
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 7 +++++--
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c | 1 +
> 4 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> index 5da74b46e202..c8fe548af41d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> @@ -2296,6 +2296,7 @@ static int i915_rps_boost_info(struct seq_file *m, void
> *data)
> list_empty(&file_priv->rps_boost) ? "" : ", active");
> rcu_read_unlock();
> }
> + seq_printf(m, "Semaphore boosts: %d\n",
> dev_priv->rps.semaphores.rps_boosts);
> seq_printf(m, "Kernel boosts: %d\n", dev_priv->rps.boosts);
>
> mutex_unlock(&dev_priv->rps.hw_lock);
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> index d35778797ef0..057a1346e81f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h
> @@ -268,6 +268,22 @@ struct drm_i915_private;
> struct i915_mm_struct;
> struct i915_mmu_object;
>
> +struct drm_i915_file_private {
> + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv;
> + struct drm_file *file;
> +
> + struct {
> + spinlock_t lock;
> + struct list_head request_list;
> + } mm;
> + struct idr context_idr;
> +
> + struct list_head rps_boost;
> + struct intel_engine_cs *bsd_ring;
> +
> + unsigned rps_boosts;
> +};
This looks really confusing to me and feels a bit too much like abuse. I
think extracting a tiny struct intel_rps_boost_client and switching the
interfaces of gen6_rps_boost and __i915_wait_request over to it instead of
using the file_priv would be a lot clearer.
Otherwise these two patches make a lot of sense, but can you please cc
Deepak when resending for his ack/r-b?
Thanks, Daniel
> +
> enum intel_dpll_id {
> DPLL_ID_PRIVATE = -1, /* non-shared dpll in use */
> /* real shared dpll ids must be >= 0 */
> @@ -1047,6 +1063,8 @@ struct intel_gen6_power_mgmt {
> struct list_head clients;
> unsigned boosts;
>
> + struct drm_i915_file_private semaphores;
> +
> /* manual wa residency calculations */
> struct intel_rps_ei up_ei, down_ei;
>
> @@ -2185,22 +2203,6 @@ static inline void i915_gem_request_assign(struct
> drm_i915_gem_request **pdst,
> * a later patch when the call to i915_seqno_passed() is obsoleted...
> */
>
> -struct drm_i915_file_private {
> - struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv;
> - struct drm_file *file;
> -
> - struct {
> - spinlock_t lock;
> - struct list_head request_list;
> - } mm;
> - struct idr context_idr;
> -
> - struct list_head rps_boost;
> - struct intel_engine_cs *bsd_ring;
> -
> - unsigned rps_boosts;
> -};
> -
> /*
> * A command that requires special handling by the command parser.
> */
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> index a32a84598fac..3d31ff11fbef 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> @@ -3045,9 +3045,12 @@ __i915_gem_object_sync(struct drm_i915_gem_object *obj,
> return ret;
>
> if (!i915_semaphore_is_enabled(obj->base.dev)) {
> + struct drm_i915_private *i915 = to_i915(obj->base.dev);
> ret = __i915_wait_request(rq,
> -
> atomic_read(&to_i915(obj->base.dev)->gpu_error.reset_counter),
> -
> to_i915(obj->base.dev)->mm.interruptible, NULL, NULL);
> +
> atomic_read(&i915->gpu_error.reset_counter),
> + i915->mm.interruptible,
> + NULL,
> + &i915->rps.semaphores);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> index d3f4e9593db1..3e274cf3adaa 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_pm.c
> @@ -6827,6 +6827,7 @@ void intel_pm_setup(struct drm_device *dev)
> INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&dev_priv->rps.delayed_resume_work,
> intel_gen6_powersave_work);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dev_priv->rps.clients);
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dev_priv->rps.semaphores.rps_boost);
>
> dev_priv->pm.suspended = false;
> }
> --
> 2.1.4
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
