All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Dixit, Ashutosh" <ashutosh.dixit@intel.com>
To: Umesh Nerlige Ramappa <umesh.nerlige.ramappa@intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 8/9] drm/i915/perf: Add engine class instance parameters to perf
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 16:24:06 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <878rg5mp21.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZApe3KFGlrVO20vn@orsosgc001.jf.intel.com>

On Thu, 09 Mar 2023 14:34:04 -0800, Umesh Nerlige Ramappa wrote:
>

Hi Umesh,

> On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 10:08:13AM -0800, Dixit, Ashutosh wrote:
> > On Tue, 07 Mar 2023 12:16:10 -0800, Umesh Nerlige Ramappa wrote:
> >>
> >
> >> One or more engines map to a specific OA unit. All reports from these
> >> engines are captured in the OA buffer managed by this OA unit.
> >>
> >> Current i915 OA implementation supports only the OAG unit. OAG primarily
> >> caters to render engine, so i915 OA uses render as the default engine
> >> in the OA implementation. Since there are more OA units on newer
> >> hardware that map to other engines, allow user to pass engine class and
> >> instance to select and program specific OA units.
> >
> > I believe there is another uapi issue to be resolved here: how the engines
> > are associated with OA units, since from the point of view of the uapi
> > there are multiple engines and multiple OA units (even if in the actual
> > implementation at present there is only one OA unit per gt). In the
> > internal tree we had added oa_unit_id to engine_info for this. So if
> > multiple engines had the same oa_unit_id, user could pass class:instance of
> > any of those engines to get oa data from that OA unit (and generally know
> > how engines are hooked up to OA units (the OA unit topology)).
> >
> > So the question is even if we don't implement it as part of this series (or
> > do we have to?) do we at least need to agree to that uapi which will be
> > used to associate OA units with engines?
>
> It did make more sense for xehpsdv and other platforms where we had
> multiple OA units per GT and each GT had render and/or compute engines.  In
> those cases, media and compute/render UMDs may have needed to know that
> topology.
>
> For MTL, I don't think that an end user will benefit from the
> engine<->oa_unit mapping because
>
> (1) media and render are separate GTs
> (2) there is just one OA unit per GT and
> (3) assuming media and render/compute are separate UMDs,

Well our uapi does not expose any of this so we are relying on outside
information here. So I think it is needed even for MTL, but that's a
problem for the person reviewing the uapi. Afaiac we can do it later
if/when there is a specific ask for it, it's ok with me as is.

I will R-b the patch after we fix the engine class/instance pairing.

Thanks.
--
Ashutosh

>
> That's also the reason why the corresponding IGT series just uses a static
> mapping for MTL.
>
> If we come across a case where the UMD needs this info OR we are supporting
> a platform with multiple OA units per tile, we should add the topology.


  reply	other threads:[~2023-03-10  0:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-03-07 20:16 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 0/9] Add OAM support for MTL Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2023-03-07 20:16 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 1/9] drm/i915/perf: Drop wakeref on GuC RC error Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2023-03-07 20:16 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 2/9] drm/i915/perf: Add helper to check supported OA engines Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2023-03-07 20:16 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 3/9] drm/i915/perf: Validate OA sseu config outside switch Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2023-03-07 20:16 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 4/9] drm/i915/perf: Group engines into respective OA groups Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2023-03-07 20:16 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 5/9] drm/i915/perf: Fail modprobe if i915_perf_init fails on OOM Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2023-03-07 20:16 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 6/9] drm/i915/perf: Parse 64bit report header formats correctly Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2023-03-07 20:16 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 7/9] drm/i915/perf: Handle non-power-of-2 reports Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2023-03-07 20:16 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 8/9] drm/i915/perf: Add engine class instance parameters to perf Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2023-03-08  1:45   ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2023-03-09 22:36     ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2023-03-08 18:08   ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2023-03-09 22:34     ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2023-03-10  0:24       ` Dixit, Ashutosh [this message]
2023-03-07 20:16 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 9/9] drm/i915/perf: Add support for OA media units Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2023-03-09 23:57   ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2023-03-10 16:39     ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2023-03-10 17:36       ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2023-03-11  0:18         ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2023-03-11  3:13           ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2023-03-14  9:13 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: warning for Add OAM support for MTL Patchwork

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=878rg5mp21.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com \
    --to=ashutosh.dixit@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=umesh.nerlige.ramappa@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.