On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 02:18:00PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote: > On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Martin Peres <martin.peres@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Answers inlined. > > > > Le 04/06/2012 19:19, Jerome Glisse a écrit : > > > >> > >> My point is that there is no way for power management to find an API > >> that fits all GPU. If i were to do it now, i would have one ioctl > >> version for r3xx, one for r5xx, one for r6xx/r7xx, one for r8xx, one > >> for r9xx, ... yes there would be some common fields accross them. > > > > Right, but would the userspace care for so much information? > > I think it might, think about newer GPU where we could let user do a > custom profile to restrict the GPU into some range of power > consumption/temperature/fan speed .... What kind of information i > would want to expose would be highly GPU family related. In i915-land we're trying to make things Just Work. If needed we can expose (generation/platform-specific) tunables in sysfs. But on snb and later the combination of rc6+gpu turbo (mostly handled all by hw) is rather ok, so I don't see anything going above and beyond a min/max frequency limiter: Moving the min upwards would help for benchmarking, pushing the max doin might help conserver power for sucky let's eat everything gpu workloads. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Mail: daniel@xxxxxxxx Mobile: +41 (0)79 365 57 48 _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
