Hi Chris, On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 09:54:06AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > As with the realisation for soft-rc6, we respond to idling the engines > within microseconds, far faster than the response times for HW RC6 and > RPS. Furthermore, our fast parking upon idle, prevents HW RPS from > running for many desktop workloads, as the RPS evaluation intervals are > on the order of tens of milliseconds, but the typical workload is just a > couple of milliseconds, but yet we still need to determine the best > frequency for user latency versus power. > > Recognising that the HW evaluation intervals are a poor fit, and that > they were deprecated [in bspec at least] from gen10, start to wean > ourselves off them and replace the EI with a timer and our accurate > busy-stats. The principle benefit of manually evaluating RPS intervals > is that we can be more responsive for better performance and powersaving > for both spiky workloads and steady-state. > > Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/1698 > Fixes: 98479ada421a ("drm/i915/gt: Treat idling as a RPS downclock event") > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@xxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@xxxxxxxxx> Thanks, Andi _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
