From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, HK_RANDOM_FROM,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04B4CC433DF for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 07:40:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D5B3E207D8 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 07:40:31 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D5B3E207D8 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 578F96EADD; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 07:40:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E9466E237 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 07:40:29 +0000 (UTC) IronPort-SDR: McWDwy1GMpFUU6RJuMwnoel3tRD4PFCSKTw6mTTkOo8aZdfHOA5JNtbjzKrklkantE9g54A6jx +1Pgu9OmV3BQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9655"; a="130891536" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,525,1583222400"; d="scan'208";a="130891536" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 Jun 2020 00:40:28 -0700 IronPort-SDR: p0TloFv56gZ69pSyDLZdj9HPCCyzGVGbSmwGVfuEmLU9bCZuw9wZDViA00+tb3IsqLAP2rkM1s B24XhnBhWaJw== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,525,1583222400"; d="scan'208";a="450548762" Received: from ttulbure-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.252.33.49]) ([10.252.33.49]) by orsmga005-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 Jun 2020 00:40:27 -0700 To: Chris Wilson , Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org References: <20200617160120.16555-1-tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com> <20200617160120.16555-2-tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com> <159246447431.2739.9873271400703393063@build.alporthouse.com> From: Tvrtko Ursulin Organization: Intel Corporation UK Plc Message-ID: <09894f81-19b3-4dde-0764-ec042a5c61e8@linux.intel.com> Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 08:40:25 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <159246447431.2739.9873271400703393063@build.alporthouse.com> Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH i-g-t 01/10] gem_wsim: Rip out userspace balancing X-BeenThere: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel graphics driver community testing & development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" On 18/06/2020 08:14, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2020-06-17 17:01:11) >> From: Tvrtko Ursulin >> >> Evaluation of userspace load balancing options was how this tool started >> but since we have settled on doing it in the kernel. >> >> Tomorrow we will want to update the tool for new engine interfaces and all >> this legacy code will just be a distraction. >> >> Rip out everything not related to explicit load balancing implemented via >> context engine maps and adjust the workloads to use it. > > Hmm, if this is on the table, should we also then restrict > load-balancing wsim to gen11+ so that we can use the timed loops rather > nop batches? That would be a huge selling point, and I'll just keep an > old checkout around for nop load balancing with all the trimmings. That was my plan for the next step yes. Just taking your patch without further changes would already make it work I think. But also at some point I want to convert the engine selection (and engine naming in descriptors) to class:instance. Why do you need the nop/old balancing stuff? I would hope going forward we only need to compare current balancing against any changes. So I'd really like to remoev the userspace balancing stuff. Regards, Tvrtko _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx