From: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com>
To: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Michal Feix <michal@feix.cz>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, fritsch@xbmc.org,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
miku@iki.fi, Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar>,
"# v4 . 2+" <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Avoid tweaking evaluation thresholds on Baytrail v3
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 15:22:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o9xnbwff.fsf@gaia.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170227092519.GE13095@nuc-i3427.alporthouse.com>
Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 03:52:59PM +0200, Mika Kuoppala wrote:
>> Certain Baytrails, namely the 4 cpu core variants, have been
>> plaqued by spurious system hangs, mostly occurring with light loads.
>>
>> Multiple bisects by various people point to a commit which changes the
>> reclocking strategy for Baytrail to follow its bigger brethen:
>> commit 8fb55197e64d ("drm/i915: Agressive downclocking on Baytrail")
>>
>> There is also a review comment attached to this commit from Deepak S
>> on avoiding punit access on Cherryview and thus it was excluded on
>> common reclocking path. By taking the same approach and omitting
>> the punit access by not tweaking the thresholds when the hardware
>> has been asked to move into different frequency, considerable gains
>> in stability have been observed.
>>
>> With J1900 box, light render/video load would end up in system hang
>> in usually less than 12 hours. With this patch applied, the cumulative
>> uptime has now been 34 days without issues. To provoke system hang,
>> light loads on both render and bsd engines in parallel have been used:
>> glxgears >/dev/null 2>/dev/null &
>> mpv --vo=vaapi --hwdec=vaapi --loop=inf vid.mp4
>>
>> So far, author has not witnessed system hang with above load
>> and this patch applied. Reports from the tenacious people at
>> kernel bugzilla are also promising.
>>
>> Considering that the punit access frequency with this patch is
>> considerably less, there is a possibility that this will push
>> the, still unknown, root cause past the triggering point on most loads.
>>
>> But as we now can reliably reproduce the hang independently,
>> we can reduce the pain that users are having and use a
>> static thresholds until a root cause is found.
>>
>> v3: don't break debugfs and simplification (Chris Wilson)
>>
>> References: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109051
>> Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
>> Cc: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
>> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
>> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
>> Cc: fritsch@xbmc.org
>> Cc: miku@iki.fi
>> Cc: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar>
>> CC: Michal Feix <michal@feix.cz>
>> Cc: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Deepak S <deepak.s@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v4.2+
>> Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
>> Signed-off-by: Mika Kuoppala <mika.kuoppala@intel.com>
>
> Had a couple of weekends to try and find an alternative explanation
> (a root cause for the hangs would be nice!). If it is just the writes to
> the RPS registers, are we safe on resume (etc)?
>
> However, I've drawn a blank on explaining what the hw is doing wrong
> (but found a couple of bugs in the byt manual RPS evaluation which
> desire review), so
> Acked-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Pushed, thanks.
-Mika
> -Chris
>
> --
> Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-27 13:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-15 12:37 [PATCH] drm/i915: Avoid tweaking evaluation thresholds on Baytrail v2 Mika Kuoppala
2017-02-15 12:52 ` Chris Wilson
2017-02-15 13:51 ` Mika Kuoppala
2017-02-15 13:52 ` [PATCH] drm/i915: Avoid tweaking evaluation thresholds on Baytrail v3 Mika Kuoppala
2017-02-27 9:25 ` Chris Wilson
2017-02-27 13:22 ` Mika Kuoppala [this message]
2017-02-15 15:28 ` ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for drm/i915: Avoid tweaking evaluation thresholds on Baytrail v2 (rev2) Patchwork
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=87o9xnbwff.fsf@gaia.fi.intel.com \
--to=mika.kuoppala@linux.intel.com \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar \
--cc=fritsch@xbmc.org \
--cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=jani.nikula@intel.com \
--cc=jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=michal@feix.cz \
--cc=miku@iki.fi \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.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