On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 12:11:51PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-10-02 12:02:26)
> >
> > On 02/10/2018 09:36, 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.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: Tomi Sarvela <tomi.p.sarvela@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++--
> > > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> > > index b4744a68cd88..ce17a53b3a66 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> > > @@ -2215,8 +2215,22 @@ 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;
> > > struct drm_file *file;
> > >
> > > + if (intel_runtime_pm_get_if_in_use(dev_priv)) {
> > > + if (IS_VALLEYVIEW(dev_priv) || IS_CHERRYVIEW(dev_priv)) {
> > > + mutex_lock(&dev_priv->pcu_lock);
> > > + act_freq = vlv_punit_read(dev_priv,
> > > + PUNIT_REG_GPU_FREQ_STS);
> >
> > There is another read site for this reg which right shifts and masks
> > before passing to intel_gpu_freq. Who is right and who is wrong? :)
>
> Considering that's where I copied from... Oops.
Worth adding intel_gpu_act_freq() or something?
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
