On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 09:49:02AM +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On 07/09/2017 01:37, Anusha Srivatsa wrote:
> > Calculate the time that GuC takes to load.
> > This information could be very useful in
> > determining if GuC is taking unreasonably long time
> > to load in a certain platforms.
>
> Do we need this in debugfs or a DRM_NOTE or something would be sufficient if
> the load time is above certain threshold?
Yeah I'd vote for dmesg logging too.
-Daniel
>
> Also, what are the typical times here? Are jiffies precise enough? Could be
> only 10ms granularity on some kernels.
>
> Depending on the above, more or less applicable comments below:
>
> > v2: Calculate time before logs are collected.
> > Move the guc_load_time variable as a part of
> > intel_uc_fw struct. Store only final result
> > which is to be exported to debugfs. (Michal)
> > Add the load time in the print message as well.
> >
> > Cc: Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundaresan@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Oscar Mateo <oscar.mateo@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.srivatsa@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 3 +++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_loader.c | 8 ++++++++
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> > index 48572b157222..e0b99dbc6608 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> > @@ -2379,6 +2379,9 @@ static int i915_guc_load_status_info(struct seq_file *m, void *data)
> > guc_fw->major_ver_wanted, guc_fw->minor_ver_wanted);
> > seq_printf(m, "\tversion found: %d.%d\n",
> > guc_fw->major_ver_found, guc_fw->minor_ver_found);
> > + seq_printf(m, "\tGuC Load time is %lu ms\n",
> > + jiffies_to_msecs(guc_fw->guc_load_time));
>
> OCD: "GuC load time: %lums" to make it more consistent with the other
> entries here?
>
> > +
> > seq_printf(m, "\theader: offset is %d; size = %d\n",
> > guc_fw->header_offset, guc_fw->header_size);
> > seq_printf(m, "\tuCode: offset is %d; size = %d\n",
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_loader.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_loader.c
> > index 8b0ae7fce7f2..da917f84c471 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_loader.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_loader.c
> > @@ -199,6 +199,7 @@ static int guc_ucode_xfer_dma(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> > struct sg_table *sg = vma->pages;
> > u32 status, rsa[UOS_RSA_SCRATCH_MAX_COUNT];
> > int i, ret = 0;
> > + unsigned long guc_start_load, guc_finish_load;
> > /* where RSA signature starts */
> > offset = guc_fw->rsa_offset;
> > @@ -226,6 +227,7 @@ static int guc_ucode_xfer_dma(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> > /* Finally start the DMA */
> > I915_WRITE(DMA_CTRL, _MASKED_BIT_ENABLE(UOS_MOVE | START_DMA));
> > + guc_start_load = jiffies;
> > /*
> > * Wait for the DMA to complete & the GuC to start up.
> > @@ -237,6 +239,9 @@ static int guc_ucode_xfer_dma(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
> > */
> > ret = wait_for(guc_ucode_response(dev_priv, &status), 100);
> > + guc_finish_load = jiffies;
> > + guc_fw->guc_load_time = guc_finish_load - guc_start_load;
>
> Strictly speaking you don't need the guc_finish_load local.
>
> > +
> > DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("DMA status 0x%x, GuC status 0x%x\n",
> > I915_READ(DMA_CTRL), status);
> > @@ -372,6 +377,9 @@ int intel_guc_init_hw(struct intel_guc *guc)
> > guc->fw.path,
> > guc->fw.major_ver_found, guc->fw.minor_ver_found);
> > + DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("Time taken to load GuC is %lu\n",
> > + guc->fw.guc_load_time);
> > +
> > return 0;
> > }
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h
> > index 22ae52b17b0f..52aa05d13863 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc.h
> > @@ -154,6 +154,7 @@ struct intel_uc_fw {
> > uint32_t rsa_offset;
> > uint32_t ucode_size;
> > uint32_t ucode_offset;
> > + unsigned long guc_load_time;
>
> Looks wrong to add guc_ (and later huc_) prefixed members in the common
> struct since both intel_guc and intel_huc encapsulate it. If you just had a
> single field and called it load_time, wouldn't you get separate copies for
> guc and huc automatically?
>
> Regards,
>
> Tvrtko
>
> > };
> > struct intel_guc_log {
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
