From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] drm/i915: Convert the register access
 tracepoint to be conditional
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 17:09:48 +0100
Message-ID: <20130716160948.GA6210@cantiga.alporthouse.com>
References: <1373648907-28774-1-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
	<1373648907-28774-6-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
	<20130714202810.GD24025@bwidawsk.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from fireflyinternet.com (s16502780.onlinehome-server.info
	[87.106.93.118])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75ED0E6C8C
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Tue, 16 Jul 2013 09:09:57 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130714202810.GD24025@bwidawsk.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 01:28:11PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 06:08:27PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > The TRACE_EVENT_CONDITION is supposed to generate more efficient code
> > than if (cond) trace(), which is what we are currently using inside the
> > register access functions.
> > 
> > v2: Rebase onto uncore
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> 
> One thing I've thought about this is a trace_on_once, or trace_on_poll
> would be cool for polled reads. Obviously we can post-process it, but we
> always risk losing events if we fill up too much of the ringbuffer with
> stuff we don't care about.

I see what you mean, having a singular entry would be better than none.
We could use a local variable and a new macro.

> In any case, I very much like the condition added to the trace itself,
> and reading probably the same docs as you agree it should be faster.
> 
> Looking over our code. It looks like I missed trace events when writing
> the PTEs in i915_gem_gtt.c. Can you get around to fixing those up?

Indeed, we need to do a review of what tracepoints we have and we need.
-Chris

-- 
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre