Re: [PATCH 6/7] drm/i915/skl: Updated the 'i915_frequency_info' debugs function

From: Damien Lespiau <damien.lespiau@intel.com>
To: akash.goel@intel.com
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] drm/i915/skl: Updated the 'i915_frequency_info' debugs function
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2015 15:38:05 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150217153805.GD18727@strange.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1423234598-14781-7-git-send-email-akash.goel@intel.com>

On Fri, Feb 06, 2015 at 08:26:37PM +0530, akash.goel@intel.com wrote:
> From: Akash Goel <akash.goel@intel.com>
> 
> Added support for SKL in the 'i915_frequency_info' debugfs function
> 
> Signed-off-by: Akash Goel <akash.goel@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 10 ++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> index 9af17fb..32c62a2 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
> @@ -1089,7 +1089,7 @@ static int i915_frequency_info(struct seq_file *m, void *unused)
>  		seq_printf(m, "Current P-state: %d\n",
>  			   (rgvstat & MEMSTAT_PSTATE_MASK) >> MEMSTAT_PSTATE_SHIFT);
>  	} else if (IS_GEN6(dev) || (IS_GEN7(dev) && !IS_VALLEYVIEW(dev)) ||
> -		   IS_BROADWELL(dev)) {
> +		   IS_BROADWELL(dev) || IS_GEN9(dev)) {

Can we be optimistic by default (and hope next platform will be no extra
work by having a INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen >= 9)?

>  		u32 gt_perf_status = I915_READ(GEN6_GT_PERF_STATUS);
>  		u32 rp_state_limits = I915_READ(GEN6_RP_STATE_LIMITS);
>  		u32 rp_state_cap = I915_READ(GEN6_RP_STATE_CAP);
> @@ -1109,8 +1109,12 @@ static int i915_frequency_info(struct seq_file *m, void *unused)
>  
>  		reqf = I915_READ(GEN6_RPNSWREQ);
>  		reqf &= ~GEN6_TURBO_DISABLE;
> +		if (!IS_GEN9(dev))
> +			reqf &= ~GEN6_TURBO_DISABLE;

It seems like you to remove one masking of bit 31? (can we have >= 9 as
well?).  

Maybe a simpler way to go about it would be:

		if (INTEL_INFO(dev)->gen >= 9)
			reqf >>= 23;
		else {
			reqf &= ~GEN6_TURBO_DISABLE;
			if (IS_HASWELL(dev) || IS_BROADWELL(dev))
				reqf >>= 24;
			else
				reqf >>= 25;
		}

>  		if (IS_HASWELL(dev) || IS_BROADWELL(dev))
>  			reqf >>= 24;
> +		else if IS_GEN9(dev)
> +			reqf >>= 23;
>  		else
>  			reqf >>= 25;
>  		reqf = intel_gpu_freq(dev_priv, reqf);
> @@ -1128,6 +1132,8 @@ static int i915_frequency_info(struct seq_file *m, void *unused)
>  		rpprevdown = I915_READ(GEN6_RP_PREV_DOWN);
>  		if (IS_HASWELL(dev) || IS_BROADWELL(dev))
>  			cagf = (rpstat & HSW_CAGF_MASK) >> HSW_CAGF_SHIFT;
> +		else if (IS_GEN9(dev))
> +			cagf = (rpstat & GEN9_CAGF_MASK) >> GEN9_CAGF_SHIFT;
>  		else
>  			cagf = (rpstat & GEN6_CAGF_MASK) >> GEN6_CAGF_SHIFT;

cagf (as well as reqf) is(are) used in a printf saying they are Mhz. That looks
wrong.

>  		cagf = intel_gpu_freq(dev_priv, cagf);
> @@ -1152,7 +1158,7 @@ static int i915_frequency_info(struct seq_file *m, void *unused)
>  			   pm_ier, pm_imr, pm_isr, pm_iir, pm_mask);
>  		seq_printf(m, "GT_PERF_STATUS: 0x%08x\n", gt_perf_status);
>  		seq_printf(m, "Render p-state ratio: %d\n",
> -			   (gt_perf_status & 0xff00) >> 8);
> +			   (gt_perf_status & (IS_GEN9(dev) ? 0x1ff00 : 0xff00)) >> 8);

Eeek, that's a weird name to say freq. Here the 16.66 unit strikes back, can we
have at least a comment?

>  		seq_printf(m, "Render p-state VID: %d\n",
>  			   gt_perf_status & 0xff);
>  		seq_printf(m, "Render p-state limit: %d\n",
> -- 
> 1.9.2
> 
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx