Hi guys,
Anyone has the bandwidth to review the below tiny patch, or suggest some
else as potential reviewer?
Truth be told I only tested it lightly, but it passed the perf_pmu unit
tests. Goal is to bring engine busyness PMU reporting accuracy to the
same level as execlists.
Regards,
Tvrtko
On 29/11/2017 12:33, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Wire up the engine busy stats accounting to the GuC submission backend.
Since there is not context out interrupt we need to place the accounting
callbacks per-request in order to correctly pair with user interrupts.
v2: Rebase.
v3: Commit update.
Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c
index 912ff143d531..d80d2a3214da 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_submission.c
@@ -781,6 +781,7 @@ static void guc_dequeue(struct intel_engine_cs *engine)
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&rq->priotree.link);
__i915_gem_request_submit(rq);
+ intel_engine_context_in(rq->engine);
trace_i915_gem_request_in(rq,
port_index(port, execlists));
last = rq;
@@ -813,6 +814,7 @@ static void guc_submission_tasklet(unsigned long data)
rq = port_request(&port[0]);
while (rq && i915_gem_request_completed(rq)) {
+ intel_engine_context_out(rq->engine);
trace_i915_gem_request_out(rq);
i915_gem_request_put(rq);
@@ -1453,8 +1455,6 @@ int intel_guc_submission_enable(struct intel_guc *guc)
execlists->tasklet.func = guc_submission_tasklet;
engine->park = guc_submission_park;
engine->unpark = guc_submission_unpark;
-
- engine->flags &= ~I915_ENGINE_SUPPORTS_STATS;
}
return 0;
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
