Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] drm/i915: Agressive downclocking on Baytrail

From: Deepak S <deepak.s@linux.intel.com>
To: "Chris Wilson" <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
	"Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>,
	"Rodrigo Vivi" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
	"Daniel Vetter" <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] drm/i915: Agressive downclocking on Baytrail
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 16:57:21 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55096119.7090704@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150318112345.GE10812@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>


On Wednesday 18 March 2015 04:53 PM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 04:45:08PM +0530, Deepak S wrote:
>>> +	if (val != dev_priv->rps.cur_freq) {
>>>   		vlv_punit_write(dev_priv, PUNIT_REG_GPU_FREQ_REQ, val);
>>> +		gen6_set_rps_thresholds(dev_priv, val);
>> I think gen6_set_rps_thresholds should be under baytrail specific with platform check?
> The only difference for cherryview is that it doesn't use
> GEN6_RP_MEDIA_TURBO. Was that intentional?
>
> The whole idea is that RPS should be autotuning for different workloads,
> but those metrics are equivalent across GPU.
> -Chris
>
Atleast based on the spec GEN6_RP_MEDIA_TURBO left out of CHV. I am yet to look at the latest Spec.

Also, Most of RP register for CHV falls under Comman well, I hope re-adjusting the rps_threshold will
not causing power issues since we have to wakeup both RENDER/MEDIA to access the register

-Deepak

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx