All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
To: "Dec, Katarzyna" <katarzyna.dec@intel.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Cc: "intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH i-g-t v2] pm_rps: Changes in waitboost scenario
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2017 12:29:31 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <150331497130.11560.11500397923533671785@mail.alporthouse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6BC55F4CEF547644A9D51A31779E833B57A847FD@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>

Quoting Dec, Katarzyna (2017-08-21 11:43:35)
> I just saw comments for the code (in first patch version)
> 
> >  static void boost_freq(int fd, int *boost_freqs)  {
> >         int64_t timeout = 1;
> > -       int ring = -1;
> >         igt_spin_t *load;
> > +       unsigned int engine;
> >  
> > -       load = igt_spin_batch_new(fd, ring, 0);
> > -
> > +       /* put boost on the same engine as low load */
> > +       engine = I915_EXEC_RENDER;
> > +       if (intel_gen(lh.devid) >= 6)
> > +               engine = I915_EXEC_BLT;
> > +       load = igt_spin_batch_new(fd, engine, 0);
> 
> >Something to note is that spin-batch will also force the GPU to maximum.
> So we can get rid of gem_wait in this case?

No. Since the test is all about the wait -> boost scenario, not that
high load generates high cocks.
 
> >You could set the boost freq > max freq to differentiate
> What do you mean by that?

If you set the max freq to less than the boost freq, the only way to get
to the boost freq is via the wait, and through the ordinary system load.
It is another way to prove that boosting is in effect, and also the
independence of the control knobs.

> >         /* Waiting will grant us a boost to maximum */
> >         gem_wait(fd, load->handle, &timeout);
> >  
> >         read_freqs(boost_freqs);
> >         dump(boost_freqs);
> > +       igt_assert_eq(is_in_boost(), 1);
> 
> >Will fail on older kernels.
> This assert was changed in v2 to igt_assert(). Will this also fail on older kernels? If yes, why?

The field you are looking for is a recent addition to the file. Within
reason, we expect igt to be agnostic of kernel version (aiming for
forwards compatibility with future kernels for minimum effort, and
backwards for maximum coverage). Sometimes we can't write the test we
want without relying on a new kernel.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

  reply	other threads:[~2017-08-21 11:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-08-18  7:33 [PATCH i-g-t] pm_rps: Changes in waitboost scenario Katarzyna Dec
2017-08-18  7:57 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2017-08-18 11:08 ` [PATCH i-g-t v2] " Katarzyna Dec
2017-08-18 13:45   ` Chris Wilson
2017-08-18 20:28     ` Daniel Vetter
2017-08-18 20:42       ` Chris Wilson
2017-08-21  8:29         ` Dec, Katarzyna
2017-08-21  8:53           ` Chris Wilson
2017-08-21 10:43             ` Dec, Katarzyna
2017-08-21 11:29               ` Chris Wilson [this message]
2017-08-18 13:47   ` Chris Wilson
2017-08-21 13:50   ` [PATCH i-g-t v3] " Katarzyna Dec
2017-08-22 12:40     ` Katarzyna Dec
2017-08-24  9:44       ` Chris Wilson
2017-08-28  8:50       ` [PATCH i-g-t v4] " Katarzyna Dec
2017-08-29  7:43         ` Szwichtenberg, Radoslaw
2017-08-29  8:30           ` Daniel Vetter
2017-08-29  8:57         ` [PATCH i-g-t v5] " Katarzyna Dec
2017-08-30 13:05           ` [PATCH i-g-t v6] " Katarzyna Dec
2017-08-30 13:21             ` [PATCH i-g-t v7] " Katarzyna Dec
2017-08-31  7:40               ` [PATCH i-g-t v8] " Katarzyna Dec
2017-08-18 13:22 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for pm_rps: Changes in waitboost scenario (rev2) Patchwork
2017-08-18 13:38 ` [PATCH i-g-t] pm_rps: Changes in waitboost scenario Chris Wilson
2017-08-21 14:22 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for pm_rps: Changes in waitboost scenario (rev3) Patchwork
2017-08-22 13:00 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for pm_rps: Changes in waitboost scenario (rev4) Patchwork
2017-08-28  9:09 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for pm_rps: Changes in waitboost scenario (rev6) Patchwork
2017-08-28 10:20 ` ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: warning " Patchwork
2017-08-29  9:16 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for pm_rps: Changes in waitboost scenario (rev7) Patchwork
2017-08-29 10:27 ` ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: warning " Patchwork
2017-08-30 13:28 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for pm_rps: Changes in waitboost scenario (rev8) Patchwork
2017-08-30 13:45 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for pm_rps: Changes in waitboost scenario (rev9) Patchwork
2017-08-30 14:53 ` ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: warning " Patchwork
2017-08-31 13:03 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for pm_rps: Changes in waitboost scenario (rev10) Patchwork
2017-08-31 14:31   ` Arkadiusz Hiler

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=150331497130.11560.11500397923533671785@mail.alporthouse.com \
    --to=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
    --cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=katarzyna.dec@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.