All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
To: "Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] drm/i915: Grab the vblank evasion lock around the entire evasion.
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 11:19:42 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <02696dd7-8f2e-e76d-cb74-48df891670f6@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180212170100.GS5453@intel.com>

Op 12-02-18 om 18:01 schreef Ville Syrjälä:
> On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 06:21:08PM +0100, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Op 09-02-18 om 11:04 schreef Chris Wilson:
>>> Quoting Maarten Lankhorst (2018-02-09 09:53:59)
>>>> Some cleanups to move the uncore.lock around vblank evasion, so run
>>>> to completion without racing on uncore.lock. Hopefully this will reduce
>>>> the chance of underruns, and perhaps allows us to decrease 
>>>> VBLANK_EVASION_TIME_US as well as a followup patch.
>>>>
>>>> Tested on KBL and BSW.
>>> * shivers
>>>
>>> uncore.lock is a brutally contested lock. Ville's patches did work on
>>> splitting the uncore.lock into forcewake and display variants, which
>>> cuts down on the nasty side effects.
>>>
>>> Latency profiling, another item for the CI/QA wishlist.
>>> -Chris
>> Yeah, unfortunately this is not different from status quo. We already
>> require everything inside vblank evasion to run as fast as possible,
>> and it's down to a list of register writes and a few reads. Those
>> already need the uncore.lock, so all we do now is being more explicit
>> about when we take it and eliminate contention when we write out the
>> register values.
> Would be nice to have some results for this though. IIRC when I was
> benchmarking my update optimizations and the de_lock stuff I was
> simply logging how long the updates take, and staring at histograms
> of that after running a bunch of igts and whatnot. I'm not sure I
> have the results anymore, but IIRC I did see some improvement.
>
When testing with KBL and BSW, this patch series most updates complete in <40 us even with
all debug options set, with the highest amount of time being a single update of 93 us for BSW.

Because we take all locking including the vblank reference in advance, latency from acquiring
locks no longer affects the time critical part of vblank evasion.

Tested with kms_rotation_crc,

~Maarten

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

  reply	other threads:[~2018-02-13 10:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-02-09  9:53 [PATCH 0/5] drm/i915: Grab the vblank evasion lock around the entire evasion Maarten Lankhorst
2018-02-09  9:54 ` [PATCH 1/5] drm/i915: Keep vblank irq enabled during vblank evasion Maarten Lankhorst
2018-02-12 15:10   ` Chris Wilson
2018-02-12 15:16     ` Maarten Lankhorst
2018-02-12 15:22       ` Chris Wilson
2018-02-12 15:27         ` Maarten Lankhorst
2018-02-12 15:31           ` Chris Wilson
2018-02-12 15:41             ` Maarten Lankhorst
2018-02-12 16:55               ` Ville Syrjälä
2018-02-12 17:24                 ` Chris Wilson
2018-02-12 18:06                   ` Ville Syrjälä
2018-02-12 20:55                     ` Chris Wilson
2018-02-13  8:59                       ` Maarten Lankhorst
2018-02-09  9:54 ` [PATCH 2/5] drm/i915: Grab uncore.lock around enabling " Maarten Lankhorst
2018-02-12 15:16   ` Chris Wilson
2018-02-09  9:54 ` [PATCH 3/5] drm/i915: Call i915_pipe_update_start with uncore.lock held Maarten Lankhorst
2018-02-09 23:08   ` James Ausmus
2018-02-10  8:46     ` Maarten Lankhorst
2018-02-10  9:05       ` Chris Wilson
2018-02-12 15:19   ` Chris Wilson
2018-02-12 15:39     ` Maarten Lankhorst
2018-02-12 15:44       ` Chris Wilson
2018-02-12 16:41         ` Maarten Lankhorst
2018-02-09  9:54 ` [PATCH 4/5] drm/i915: Move all locking for plane updates to caller Maarten Lankhorst
2018-02-09  9:54 ` [PATCH 5/5] drm/i915: Use DOUBLE_BUFFER_CTL on top of vblank evasion for GEN9+ Maarten Lankhorst
2018-02-09 10:04 ` [PATCH 0/5] drm/i915: Grab the vblank evasion lock around the entire evasion Chris Wilson
2018-02-09 17:21   ` Maarten Lankhorst
2018-02-12 17:01     ` Ville Syrjälä
2018-02-13 10:19       ` Maarten Lankhorst [this message]
2018-02-13 10:40         ` Chris Wilson
2018-02-09 14:24 ` ✗ Fi.CI.BAT: failure for " Patchwork
2018-02-12 15:02 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2018-02-12 16:56 ` ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: warning " Patchwork

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=02696dd7-8f2e-e76d-cb74-48df891670f6@linux.intel.com \
    --to=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=ville.syrjala@linux.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.