On 10/9/2017 8:39 PM, Imre Deak wrote:
On Sat, Oct 07, 2017 at 09:33:09AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Sagar Arun Kamble (2017-10-07 08:07:23)
With GuC based SLPC, frequency control will be moved to GuC and Host will
continue to control RC6 and LLC ring frequency setup. This needs separate
handling of RPS, RC6 and LLC ring frequencies in i915 flows. We still
continue use the *gt_powersave routines with separate status variables
for RPS, RC6, ring frequency as pm.rps.enabled, pm.rc6.enabled and
pm.llc_pstate.configured respectively in dev_priv.
Post this, with SLPC changes integrated we can just skip the Host RPS path
in i915 PM flows.
v2: Added new patch 2. Addressed review comments. Pending review for last
3 patches and patch 2 currently.
v3: Fixed checkpatch issue in patch 1. Updated patch 6 with new name for
i915_runtime_pm structure variable as runtime_pm. Added new patch 7 to
move hw_lock out of rps structure. Updated patch 8 to name rc6/rps/ring
state as gt_pm. Updated patch 10 to change the llc pstate enable disable
function names. Removed WARN_ON for pcu_lock from lower level functions
in patch 11. Also addressed review comments on patch 12.
It looks ready to go (as in I couldn't see any problems in this series).
Since we are making changes a bit wider than rc6/rps internals (touching
pcode and runtime_pm), we could do with an ack or two from other
interested parties to make sure we are not digging ourselves into a hole.
The changes look good and I haven't spotted any problem, so:
Acked-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@xxxxxxxxx>
In intel_runtime_suspend() what we want after these changes is to check
if rc6 is enabled instead of rps, but that's a detail and can be done as
a follow-up.
Thanks Imre. intel_runtime_suspend change you suggested is done in patch 12.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
