Quoting Ville Syrjala (2019-03-22 18:08:03) > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > The AGPBUSY thing doesn't work on i945gm anymore. This means > the gmch is incapable of waking the CPU from C3 when an interrupt > is generated. The interrupts just get postponed indefinitely until > something wakes up the CPU. This is rather annoying for vblank > interrupts as we are unable to maintain a steady framerate > unless the machine is sufficiently loaded to stay out of C3. > > To combat this let's use pm_qos to prevent C3 whenever vblank > interrupts are enabled. To maintain reasonable amount of powersaving > we will attempt to limit this to C3 only while leaving C1 and C2 > enabled. Interesting compromise. Frankly, I had considered pm_qos in an all-or-nothing approach, partly because finding the C transitions is a bit opaque. > Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30364 > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 8 +++ > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 96 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > index f723b15527f8..0c736f8ca1b2 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > @@ -2042,6 +2042,14 @@ struct drm_i915_private { > struct i915_vma *scratch; > } gt; > > + /* For i945gm vblank irq vs. C3 workaround */ > + struct { > + struct work_struct work; > + struct pm_qos_request pm_qos; > + u8 c3_disable_latency; Ok, looks a bit tight, but checks out. > + u8 enabled; > + } i945gm_vblank; > + > /* perform PHY state sanity checks? */ > bool chv_phy_assert[2]; > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c > index 2f788291cfe0..33386f0acab3 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c > @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ > > #include <linux/sysrq.h> > #include <linux/slab.h> > +#include <linux/cpuidle.h> > #include <linux/circ_buf.h> > #include <drm/drm_irq.h> > #include <drm/drm_drv.h> > @@ -3131,6 +3132,16 @@ static int i8xx_enable_vblank(struct drm_device *dev, unsigned int pipe) > return 0; > } > > +static int i945gm_enable_vblank(struct drm_device *dev, unsigned int pipe) > +{ > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dev); > + > + if (dev_priv->i945gm_vblank.enabled++ == 0) > + schedule_work(&dev_priv->i945gm_vblank.work); I was thinking u8, isn't that a bit dangerous. But the max counter here should be num_pipes. Hmm, is the vblank spinlock local to a pipe? Nope, dev->vbl_lock. > + > + return i8xx_enable_vblank(dev, pipe); > +} > + > static int i965_enable_vblank(struct drm_device *dev, unsigned int pipe) > { > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dev); > @@ -3195,6 +3206,16 @@ static void i8xx_disable_vblank(struct drm_device *dev, unsigned int pipe) > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev_priv->irq_lock, irqflags); > } > > +static void i945gm_disable_vblank(struct drm_device *dev, unsigned int pipe) > +{ > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dev); > + > + i8xx_disable_vblank(dev, pipe); > + > + if (--dev_priv->i945gm_vblank.enabled == 0) > + schedule_work(&dev_priv->i945gm_vblank.work); > +} > + > static void i965_disable_vblank(struct drm_device *dev, unsigned int pipe) > { > struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = to_i915(dev); > @@ -3228,6 +3249,60 @@ static void gen8_disable_vblank(struct drm_device *dev, unsigned int pipe) > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev_priv->irq_lock, irqflags); > } > > +static void i945gm_vblank_work_func(struct work_struct *work) > +{ > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = > + container_of(work, struct drm_i915_private, i945gm_vblank.work); > + > + /* > + * Vblank interrupts fail to wake up the device from C3, > + * hence we want to prevent C3 usage while vblank interrupts > + * are enabled. > + */ > + pm_qos_update_request(&dev_priv->i945gm_vblank.pm_qos, > + dev_priv->i945gm_vblank.enabled ? > + dev_priv->i945gm_vblank.c3_disable_latency : > + PM_QOS_DEFAULT_VALUE); Worker is required as the update may block. I'd prefer that as READ_ONCE(dev_priv->i945gm_vblank.enabled) > +} > + > +static int cstate_disable_latency(const char *name) > +{ > + const struct cpuidle_driver *drv; > + int i; > + > + drv = cpuidle_get_driver(); > + if (!drv) > + return 0; > + > + for (i = 0; i < drv->state_count; i++) { > + const struct cpuidle_state *state = &drv->states[i]; > + > + if (!strcmp(state->name, name)) > + return state->exit_latency ? > + state->exit_latency - 1 : 0; > + } Mind if I say yuck? Will only work with the intel_idle driver. And if not present, we force the system to not sleep while vblanks are ticking over. And it is exit_latency that is compared against the qos request. Ok. It does what it says on the tin. One of the reasons I've hesitated in the past was that I considered vblanks as a background heartbeat while the system is active and pretty much constantly on while the screen is. However, I suppose that is true (and is evidenced by recent systems that do not sleep while the screens are on, at least not with an active link). The worst that can happen is someone complains about a hot laptop, and the remedy is simple if we don't succeed in killing it first, Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
