From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jani Nikula Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: Align the hangcheck wakeup to the nearest second Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2012 18:40:05 +0300 Message-ID: <87mx01orl6.fsf@intel.com> References: <1349445188-16253-1-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 132499E941 for ; Fri, 5 Oct 2012 08:40:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1349445188-16253-1-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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: Chris Wilson , intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Arjan van de Ven List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Fri, 05 Oct 2012, Chris Wilson wrote: > round_jiffies() aligns the wakeup time to the nearest second in order to > batch wakeups and reduce system load, which is useful for unimportant > coarse timers like our hangcheck. > > Suggested-by: Arjan van de Ven > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson > Cc: Arjan van de Ven > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h | 1 + > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c | 3 +-- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 5 ++--- > 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > index d8043af..f79c664 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > @@ -460,6 +460,7 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_private { > > /* For hangcheck timer */ > #define DRM_I915_HANGCHECK_PERIOD 1500 /* in ms */ > +#define DRM_I915_HANGCHECK_JIFFIES msecs_to_jiffies(DRM_I915_HANGCHECK_PERIOD) > struct timer_list hangcheck_timer; > int hangcheck_count; > uint32_t last_acthd[I915_NUM_RINGS]; > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > index c78f8e3..8e05d53 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c > @@ -2151,8 +2151,7 @@ i915_add_request(struct intel_ring_buffer *ring, > if (!dev_priv->mm.suspended) { > if (i915_enable_hangcheck) { > mod_timer(&dev_priv->hangcheck_timer, > - jiffies + > - msecs_to_jiffies(DRM_I915_HANGCHECK_PERIOD)); > + round_jiffies_relative(DRM_I915_HANGCHECK_JIFFIES)); What is DRM_I915_HANGCHECK_PERIOD based on; specifically is it a strict minimum value? Should round_jiffies_*up*_relative() be used instead? BR, Jani. > } > if (was_empty) { > queue_delayed_work(dev_priv->wq, > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c > index e18e56b..67dc487 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c > @@ -353,8 +353,7 @@ static void notify_ring(struct drm_device *dev, > if (i915_enable_hangcheck) { > dev_priv->hangcheck_count = 0; > mod_timer(&dev_priv->hangcheck_timer, > - jiffies + > - msecs_to_jiffies(DRM_I915_HANGCHECK_PERIOD)); > + round_jiffies_relative(DRM_I915_HANGCHECK_JIFFIES)); > } > } > > @@ -1787,7 +1786,7 @@ void i915_hangcheck_elapsed(unsigned long data) > repeat: > /* Reset timer case chip hangs without another request being added */ > mod_timer(&dev_priv->hangcheck_timer, > - jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(DRM_I915_HANGCHECK_PERIOD)); > + round_jiffies_relative(DRM_I915_HANGCHECK_JIFFIES)); > } > > /* drm_dma.h hooks > -- > 1.7.10.4 > > _______________________________________________ > Intel-gfx mailing list > Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx