From: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
To: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
Cc: IGT dev <igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org>, Andi Shyti <andi@etezian.org>
Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH v2] lib/i915: gem_engine_topology: get eb flags from engine's class:instance
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 11:15:24 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190624054524.GB1498@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ca53b69d-3e1c-9cf6-6b49-a80f1ee7385e@linux.intel.com>
On 2019-06-20 at 17:14:38 +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
> On 20/06/2019 14:14, Andi Shyti wrote:
> > The execution buffer flag value has now the engine index as it is
> > mapped in the context. Retrieve the mapped index by interrogating
> > the driver starting from the class/instance tuple.
> >
> > A "gem_context_get_eb_flags_ci" helper allows to avoid declaring
> > a "struct i915_engine_class_instance" for the purpose.
> >
> > Return -EINVAL if the engine is not mapped in the given context.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@intel.com>
> > Cc: Ramalingam C <ramalingam.c@intel.com>
> > ---
> > V1 --> V2 changelog:
> > --------------------
> > - refactor the code to avoid initializing the context just for
> > the purpose of getting the execution buffer flag (thanks
> > Tvrtko)
> >
> > lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.h | 6 ++++++
> > 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.c b/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.c
> > index fdd1b951672b..fd5be3491b89 100644
> > --- a/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.c
> > +++ b/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.c
> > @@ -270,6 +270,37 @@ int gem_context_lookup_engine(int fd, uint64_t engine, uint32_t ctx_id,
> > return 0;
> > }
> > +int gem_context_get_eb_flags(int fd, uint32_t ctx_id,
> > + struct i915_engine_class_instance *ci)
tvrtko and Andi,
instead of creating the i915_engine_class_instance on the go, can't we have the
intel_execution_engine2 * itself passed to this function? Anyway engine2
pointer will be available in all the time this function is called.
I am using this patch for
s/for_each_physical_engine/__for_each_physical_engine. Shall do the above change and submit?
-Ram
> > +{
> > + DEFINE_CONTEXT_ENGINES_PARAM(engines, param, ctx_id, GEM_MAX_ENGINES);
> > +
> > + /* legacy kernels */
> > + if (gem_topology_get_param(fd, ¶m)) {
> > + const struct intel_execution_engine2 *e;
> > +
> > + __for_each_static_engine(e)
> > + if (e->class == ci->engine_class &&
> > + e->instance == ci->engine_instance)
> > + return e->flags;
> > +
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* context has no engine mapped */
> > + if (!param.size)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + /* engine map lookup */
> > + for (int i = 0; i < param.size; i++)
> > + if (engines.engines[i].engine_class == ci->engine_class &&
> > + engines.engines[i].engine_instance == ci->engine_instance)
> > + return i;
> > +
> > + /* engine is not mapped in the given context */
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +}
>
> Looks good to me.. ;)
>
> > +
> > void gem_context_set_all_engines(int fd, uint32_t ctx)
> > {
> > DEFINE_CONTEXT_ENGINES_PARAM(engines, param, ctx, GEM_MAX_ENGINES);
> > diff --git a/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.h b/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.h
> > index 2415fd1e379b..57b5473bbd5a 100644
> > --- a/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.h
> > +++ b/lib/i915/gem_engine_topology.h
> > @@ -53,6 +53,12 @@ int gem_context_lookup_engine(int fd, uint64_t engine, uint32_t ctx_id,
> > void gem_context_set_all_engines(int fd, uint32_t ctx);
> > +int gem_context_get_eb_flags(int fd, uint32_t ctx_id,
> > + struct i915_engine_class_instance *ci);
> > +
> > +#define gem_context_get_eb_flags_ci(f, c, ...) \
> > + gem_context_get_eb_flags(f, c, &((struct i915_engine_class_instance){__VA_ARGS__}))
> > +
>
> Hah this is some trick. I assume this allows:
>
> eb.flags = gem_context_get_eb_flags(fd, ctx, ..._RENDER, 0);
>
> ?
>
> What if too few or too many parameters are given? I'm in two minds but can't
> argue it is very to be able to do this in IGT.
>
> > #define __for_each_static_engine(e__) \
> > for ((e__) = intel_execution_engines2; (e__)->name; (e__)++)
> >
>
> Can you extend the series with a patch which converts the problematic
> subtests in perf_pmu to use this helper? Or even merge into this patch, I
> don't mind. Would have some moral grounds to r-b it then. ;)
>
> Regards,
>
> Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-24 5:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-20 13:14 [igt-dev] [PATCH v2] lib/i915: gem_engine_topology: get eb flags from engine's class:instance Andi Shyti
2019-06-20 16:14 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2019-06-24 5:45 ` Ramalingam C [this message]
2019-06-24 7:26 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2019-06-25 11:34 ` Andi Shyti
2019-06-20 17:19 ` [igt-dev] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2019-06-20 21:47 ` [igt-dev] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " 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=20190624054524.GB1498@intel.com \
--to=ramalingam.c@intel.com \
--cc=andi@etezian.org \
--cc=igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox