Re: [PATCH 5/5] drm/i915: debugfs entries for [e]LLC

[Chad Versace <chad.versace@linux.intel.com>]

On 07/04/2013 11:46 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 08:43:58PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 08:14:41PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 11:02:07AM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
>>>>> To make users life a little easier figuring out what they have on their
>>>>> system.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ideally, I'd really like to report LLC size, but it turned out to be a
>>>>> bit of a pain. Maybe I'll revisit it in the future.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben@bwidawsk.net>
>>>>
>>>> I think a getparam for eLLC would be neat, so that usespace can use it to
>>>> tune working set sizes.
>>>> -Daniel
>>>>
>>> And I assume drop debugfs?
>>
>> Yeah, I guess the DRM_INFO message in dmesg should be good enough
>> then. For userspace's convenience we could even look into exposing the
>> LLC size with a getparam.
>> -Daniel
>>
>
> I would like to do this since we have easy access to cpuid. I know Chad
> really wants it. If you'll accept the patch, I'll write it.

I really want to know the cache sizes.

Actually, I didn't expect the kernel to do this for me. So, I've prototyped
a patch for Mesa to probe the cache sizes with CPUID. If the
kernel does that for Mesa, then I can likely drop my Mesa patch.