On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 05:01:56PM +0530, Arun Siluvery wrote: > On 17/05/2016 16:43, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 04:32:49PM +0530, Arun Siluvery wrote: > >>On 17/05/2016 15:34, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >>>On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 10:37:14AM +0100, Arun Siluvery wrote: > >>>>This mode allows to assign EUs to pools which can process work collectively. > >>>>The command to enable this mode should be issued as part of context initialization. > >>>> > >>>>The pooled mode is global, once enabled it has to stay the same across all > >>>>contexts until HW reset hence this is sent in auxiliary golden context batch. > >>>>Thanks to Mika for the preliminary review and comments. > >>>> > >>>>v2: explain why this is enabled in golden context, use feature flag while > >>>>enabling the support (Chris) > >>>> > >>>>v3: Pooled EU support announced in userspace before enabling in kernel, > >>>>to simplify include all changes in the same patch. > >>>> > >>>>User space clients need to know when the pooled EU feature is present > >>>>and enabled on the hardware so that they can adapt work submissions. > >>>>Create a new device info flag for this purpose, and create a new GETPARAM > >>>>entry to allow user space to query its setting. > >>>> > >>>>Set has_pooled_eu to true in the Broxton static device info - Broxton > >>>>supports the feature in hardware and the driver will enable it by > >>>>default. > >>>> > >>>>Opensource users for this feature are mesa, libva and beignet. > >>> > >>>Link to those patches would be great. At least I haven't seen anything fly > >>>by for mesa or libva, might have missed it though. Note that the patches > >>>must be fully reviewed an ready for merging by respective userspace > >>>upstream, before we can land the kernel side. > >> > >>Initially beignet is trying to use it and they are adding support to it. I > >>will share links once they send them to the list, reviewed and ready to be > >>merged. > > > >Then please don't say you have the userspace when it doesn't exist yet. > > Hi Daniel, > > I never claimed userspace exists for this feature, only mentioned who are > the users and clearly stated in cover letter that Beignet team is currently > adding userspace and libdrm support, sorry if I gave that impression. Sorry for missing that, I just spotted the one line in the patch here and assumed it's all there already. > >The other question: Will existing userspace fall over if we enable this in > >the kernel, or is it purely opt-in? Would be good to clarify in the commit > >message. > Yes it is an opt-in, userspace queries its availability and configures > itself. We do have one WA affecting few revisions where it needs to be > enabled (explained in cover letter). I will add a note to the commit msg as > well. For the places where we must enable it, might be good to just merge that without the userspace flag. That way we don't block the wa on the userspace/ABI question. Then just add the patch with the getparam later on when we have the userspace reviewed. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
