Quoting Lionel Landwerlin (2019-12-16 10:41:40) > On 16/12/2019 12:27, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Lionel Landwerlin (2019-12-16 10:06:53) > >> On 16/12/2019 11:56, Chris Wilson wrote: > >> > >> Quoting Lionel Landwerlin (2019-12-16 09:46:56) > >> > >> On 16/12/2019 11:34, Chris Wilson wrote: > >> > >> Don't flat out fail if the system doesn't support OA, just skip. > >> > >> Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/issues/834 > >> Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> tests/perf.c | 4 +--- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/tests/perf.c b/tests/perf.c > >> index f5dd6051e..12f552743 100644 > >> --- a/tests/perf.c > >> +++ b/tests/perf.c > >> @@ -884,11 +884,9 @@ init_sys_info(void) > >> const char *test_set_uuid = NULL; > >> char buf[256]; > >> > >> - igt_assert_neq(devid, 0); > >> - > >> timestamp_frequency = get_cs_timestamp_frequency(); > >> igt_debug("timestamp_frequency = %lu\n", timestamp_frequency); > >> - igt_assert_neq(timestamp_frequency, 0); > >> + igt_require(timestamp_frequency); > >> > >> > >> This requires a kernel version more recent (4.16) than when perf support > >> was added (4.13). > >> > >> Is this what you intended? > >> > >> You have a fatal assert there. I am just changing it so that it skips > >> when not supported as no testing is being performed. > >> -Chris > >> > >> I think there might be a problem in i915 if this returns 0. > > It should return 0 for gen3 before Pineview. > > > > However, since it returns i915->rawclk_freq on pnv and g4x, it should > > have a value except that i915->cs_timestamp_freq is set in > > intel_device_info_runtime_init (i915_driver_hw_probe) before the > > rawclk_freq is set (i915_driver_modeset_probe). > > > > Not sure the best approach to straighten out that mess... Just delaying > > setting cs_timestamp_freq to i915_driver_register seems to be the best > > idea. > > -Chris > > That's what I remember reading from old specs (cs timestamp = a factor > of rawclk). > > So I was expecting to always get a value. > > > Can we call intel_update_rawclk() in read_timestamp_frequency() just for > the <= gen4 case? It's only defined for g4x & pnv and later. It doesn't cover earlier gen4/gen3/gen2, so still we have 0. -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
