Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-01-19 11:45:24) > > On 18/01/2018 11:57, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-01-18 10:41:36) > >> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> We add a PMU counter to expose the number of requests currently executing > >> on the GPU. > >> > >> This is useful to analyze the overall load of the system. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Ok, the split between queued (unmet dependencies), > > submitted (met dependencies, ready for hw) and running (on hw) look good > > to me. The usual slight inaccuracies that may arise due to trying to > > sample across async hw + engines, but those should be minor. And the > > counters seem very useful (at least for the trivial overlay). > > Glad to hear positive feedback! > > > The only suggestion I would make is perhaps > > > > engine->stats.unready_requests / requests_queued; > > engine->stats.requests_ready / requests_submitted; > > > > (doesn't have to be stats, but I think we want a bit more verbosity > > here). > > Hm, what is that? You are suggesting some relative stats? Exposed as > another counter? It can be calculated in userspace easily. Just trying to think of better names than engine->queued. I like 'stats' as it says "this is not part of the normal engine management, but some auxiliary information we tracked for user convenience"; then I was just trying to think of a more apropos name than 'queued'. I definitely think we want to let the reader know what's queued :) -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
