On Thu, 3 Jul 2014 15:29:26 +0100 Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Baytrail uses the RPS wait-boosting mechanism of Sandybridge+ but also has > a very lax downclocking strategy (upclock if more than 90% busy over 76ms, > downclock if less than 70% busy over 450ms). This causes Baytrail to use > maximum clocks, and for them to stay high, when doing simple tasks such as > scrolling through webpages. However, we can take a leaf out of the same > wait-boost mechansim and apply the aggressive downclocking strategy from > Sandybridge+ as well. > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- We really need a thorough test suite to cover stuff like this, mapping frequency, power, and total energy over a big set of workloads to make sure we're not adding big regressions. I know you have the cairo traces, but did you also try this with a GL benchmark suite? I'm like the change (well you did mix in a cleanup to set_rps_thresholds), I just want us to get better at collecting numbers for this stuff... -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
