On 23/07/2021 18:45, Nieto, David M wrote:
[AMD Official Use Only]
I just want to make a comment that with this approach (the ns)
calculating the percentage will take at least two reads of the fdinfo
per pid over some time. Some engines may be able to provide a single
shot percentage usage over an internal integration period. That is, for
example, what we currently have implemented for that exact reason.
I'd like to propose that we add an optional set of fields for this.
Yes it is already like that in the text I've sent out. Because I was unclear how the amdgpu accounting works I called out for you guys to fill in the blanks in the last patch:
"""
Opens:
* Does it work for AMD?
* What are the semantics of AMD engine utilisation reported in percents?
Can it align with what i915 does or needs to document the alternative
in the specification document?
"""
"""
-- drm-engine-<str>: <uint> ns
+- drm-engine-<str>: <uint> [ns|%]
...
+Where time unit is given as a percentage...[AMD folks to fill the semantics
+and interpretation of that]...
"""
So if cumulative nanoseconds definitely do not work for you, could you please fill in those blanks?
Also, I may have missed a message, but why did we remove the timstamp?
It is needed for accurate measurements of engine usage.
Hm I did not remove anything - I only renamed some of the fields output from amdgpu fdinfo.
Regards,
Tvrtko
David
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx>
*Sent:* Friday, July 23, 2021 9:47 AM
*To:* Daniel Stone <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
*Cc:* Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; intel-gfx
<Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Tvrtko Ursulin
<tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>; Koenig, Christian
<Christian.Koenig@xxxxxxx>; dri-devel <dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
Nieto, David M <David.Nieto@xxxxxxx>
*Subject:* Re: [RFC 6/8] drm: Document fdinfo format specification
On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 05:43:01PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
Hi Tvrtko,
Thanks for typing this up!
On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 at 10:18, Tvrtko Ursulin
<tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> +Mandatory fully standardised keys
> +---------------------------------
> +
> +- drm-driver: <str>
> +
> +String shall contain a fixed string uniquely identified the driver handling
> +the device in question. For example name of the respective kernel module.
I think let's be more prescriptive and just say that it is the module name.
Just a quick comment on this one.
drm_driver.name is already uapi, so let's please not invent a new one. The
shared code should probably make sure drivers don't get this wrong. Maybe
good if we document the getverion ioctl, which also exposes this, and then
link between the two.
-Daniel
> +Optional fully standardised keys
> +--------------------------------
> +
> +- drm-pdev: <aaaa:bb.cc.d>
> +
> +For PCI devices this should contain the PCI slot address of the device in
> +question.
How about just major:minor of the DRM render node device it's attached to?
> +- drm-client-id: <uint>
> +
> +Unique value relating to the open DRM file descriptor used to distinguish
> +duplicated and shared file descriptors. Conceptually the value should map 1:1
> +to the in kernel representation of `struct drm_file` instances.
> +
> +Uniqueness of the value shall be either globally unique, or unique within the
> +scope of each device, in which case `drm-pdev` shall be present as well.
> +
> +Userspace should make sure to not double account any usage statistics by using
> +the above described criteria in order to associate data to individual clients.
> +
> +- drm-engine-<str>: <uint> ns
> +
> +GPUs usually contain multiple execution engines. Each shall be given a stable
> +and unique name (str), with possible values documented in the driver specific
> +documentation.
> +
> +Value shall be in specified time units which the respective GPU engine spent
> +busy executing workloads belonging to this client.
> +
> +Values are not required to be constantly monotonic if it makes the driver
> +implementation easier, but are required to catch up with the previously reported
> +larger value within a reasonable period. Upon observing a value lower than what
> +was previously read, userspace is expected to stay with that larger previous
> +value until a monotonic update is seen.
Yeah, that would work well for Mali/Panfrost. We can queue multiple
jobs in the hardware, which can either be striped across multiple
cores with an affinity mask (e.g. 3 cores for your client and 1 for
your compositor), or picked according to priority, or ...
The fine-grained performance counters (e.g. time spent waiting for
sampler) are only GPU-global. So if you have two jobs running
simultaneously, you have no idea who's responsible for what.
But it does give us coarse-grained counters which are accounted
per-job-slot, including exactly this metric: amount of 'GPU time'
(whatever that means) occupied by that job slot during the sampling
period. So we could support that nicely if we fenced job-slot updates
with register reads/writes.
Something I'm missing though is how we enable this information. Seems
like it would be best to either only do it whilst fdinfo is open (and
re-read it whenever you need an update), or on a per-driver sysfs
toggle, or ... ?
> +- drm-memory-<str>: <uint> [KiB|MiB]
> +
> +Each possible memory type which can be used to store buffer objects by the
> +GPU in question shall be given a stable and unique name to be returned as the
> +string here.
> +
> +Value shall reflect the amount of storage currently consumed by the buffer
> +object belong to this client, in the respective memory region.
> +
> +Default unit shall be bytes with optional unit specifiers of 'KiB' or 'MiB'
> +indicating kibi- or mebi-bytes.
I'm a bit wary of the accounting here. Is it buffer allocations
originating from the client, in which case it conceptually clashes
with gralloc? Is it the client which last wrote to the buffer? The
client with the oldest open handle to the buffer? Other?
Cheers,
Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.ffwll.ch%2F&data=04%7C01%7CDavid.Nieto%40amd.com%7Cda2d9f95ced44d09f66c08d94df991da%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637626556571460650%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=GrjAYg9tG2QX7z4BDaqa4wMPj2nFcvGo4xCmD8OzwNE%3D&reserved=0
<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.ffwll.ch%2F&data=04%7C01%7CDavid.Nieto%40amd.com%7Cda2d9f95ced44d09f66c08d94df991da%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637626556571460650%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=GrjAYg9tG2QX7z4BDaqa4wMPj2nFcvGo4xCmD8OzwNE%3D&reserved=0>
