From: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
To: "S, Deepak" <deepak.s@intel.com>
Cc: "intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915/vlv: Add VLV specific force wake routines.
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 08:05:20 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131120080520.7621955c@jbarnes-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F359EE24E0B97E4A9739736D2C188EF3FAD9CA@BGSMSX102.gar.corp.intel.com>
On Wed, 20 Nov 2013 06:00:24 +0000
"S, Deepak" <deepak.s@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Jesse,
>
> Thanks for the review. Below is my response.
>
> > - why not use the callback to __vlv_force_wake_* from
> gen6_gt_force_wake_*? i.e. why is VLV special here?
> [Deepak] Gen6 has a single power well whereas the VLV is has spate wells. This was the reason for the separate function
>
> > - having a new gen7_media_force_wake function may be better than
> passing an engine around, and would touch fewer pieces of code
> [Deepak] Even Gen7 is also as single Power Well. Having common function between gen7 and vlv might be difficult to individually handle the wells.
>
> >- have you done measurements on this? given how infrequently we
> ought to be waking the wells when they're idle, and how long we
> generally keep them awake, is this a real power win?
> [Deepak] By Individually controlling the wells we observed around 100mW - 200mW saving in different scenarios (GL Beanchmark & Media playback).
wow, that's a significant savings.
Can you split the patch into one that adds the power well arg, and
another that adds the VLV support for the split? That would make it
easier to review.
Thanks,
--
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-20 16:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-14 13:32 [PATCH] drm/i915/vlv: Add VLV specific force wake routines deepak.s
2013-11-19 18:05 ` Jesse Barnes
2013-11-20 6:00 ` S, Deepak
2013-11-20 16:05 ` Jesse Barnes [this message]
2013-11-20 16:33 ` S, Deepak
2013-11-22 21:12 ` Jesse Barnes
2013-11-23 4:56 ` S, Deepak
2013-11-20 16:16 ` Daniel Vetter
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=20131120080520.7621955c@jbarnes-desktop \
--to=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=deepak.s@intel.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
/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