We reduced the clocks slowly after a boost event based on the
observation that the smoothness of animations suffered. However, since
reducing the evalution intervals, we should be able to respond to the
rapidly fluctuating workload of a simple desktop animation and so
restore the more aggressive downclocking.
References: 2a8862d2f3da ("drm/i915: Reduce the RPS shock")
Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c | 20 ++++----------------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c
index a58e08db561f..84bbd64093b0 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c
@@ -1652,30 +1652,18 @@ static void rps_work(struct work_struct *work)
adj = 0;
}
- rps->last_adj = adj;
-
/*
- * Limit deboosting and boosting to keep ourselves at the extremes
- * when in the respective power modes (i.e. slowly decrease frequencies
- * while in the HIGH_POWER zone and slowly increase frequencies while
- * in the LOW_POWER zone). On idle, we will hit the timeout and drop
- * to the next level quickly, and conversely if busy we expect to
- * hit a waitboost and rapidly switch into max power.
- */
- if ((adj < 0 && rps->power.mode == HIGH_POWER) ||
- (adj > 0 && rps->power.mode == LOW_POWER))
- rps->last_adj = 0;
-
- /* sysfs frequency interfaces may have snuck in while servicing the
- * interrupt
+ * sysfs frequency limits may have snuck in while
+ * servicing the interrupt
*/
new_freq += adj;
new_freq = clamp_t(int, new_freq, min, max);
if (intel_rps_set(rps, new_freq)) {
drm_dbg(&i915->drm, "Failed to set new GPU frequency\n");
- rps->last_adj = 0;
+ adj = 0;
}
+ rps->last_adj = adj;
mutex_unlock(&rps->lock);
--
2.20.1
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
