Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-02 12:41:18) > > On 02/10/2018 12:32, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Previously we hesitated in adding the hw probe for the actual GPU > > frequency for rps_boost as it is quite cumbersome, but given some > > surprising HW behaviour it would be useful to know both the RPS boost > > state and the actual HW state in one location. > > > > v2: vlv/chv needs more tlc > > > > Reported-by: Tomi Sarvela <tomi.p.sarvela@xxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > > index b4744a68cd88..f42e93b71e67 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > > @@ -2215,8 +2215,23 @@ static int i915_rps_boost_info(struct seq_file *m, void *data) > > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = node_to_i915(m->private); > > struct drm_device *dev = &dev_priv->drm; > > struct intel_rps *rps = &dev_priv->gt_pm.rps; > > + u32 act_freq = rps->cur_freq; > > I assume this will be zero when device is runtime suspended? If so: In theory, if it were to report, it should be idle_freq (and match cur_freq). In rps_boost, I'm not concerned about idle :) -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
