public inbox for intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Umesh Nerlige Ramappa <umesh.nerlige.ramappa@intel.com>
To: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/selftest: Bump up sample period for busy stats selftest
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2022 11:08:48 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y2QDsHVX9phoVfC3@unerlige-ril> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0a0f1b3e-eddf-9b7d-fc09-f6f097592bed@linux.intel.com>

On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 12:28:46PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
>
>On 03/11/2022 00:11, Umesh Nerlige Ramappa wrote:
>>Engine busyness samples around a 10ms period is failing with busyness
>>ranging approx. from 87% to 115%. The expected range is +/- 5% of the
>>sample period.
>>
>>When determining busyness of active engine, the GuC based engine
>>busyness implementation relies on a 64 bit timestamp register read. The
>>latency incurred by this register read causes the failure.
>>
>>On DG1, when the test fails, the observed latencies range from 900us -
>>1.5ms.
>
>Do I read this right - that the latency of a 64 bit timestamp register 
>read is 0.9 - 1.5ms? That would be the read in 
>guc_update_pm_timestamp?

Correct. That is total time taken by intel_uncore_read64_2x32() measured 
with local_clock().

One other thing I missed out in the comments is that enable_dc=0 also 
resolves the issue, but display team confirmed there is no relation to 
display in this case other than that it somehow introduces a latency in 
the reg read.

>
>Regards,
>
>Tvrtko
>
>>One solution tried was to reduce the latency between reg read and
>>CPU timestamp capture, but such optimization does not add value to user
>>since the CPU timestamp obtained here is only used for (1) selftest and
>>(2) i915 rps implementation specific to execlist scheduler. Also, this
>>solution only reduces the frequency of failure and does not eliminate
>>it.

Note that this solution is here - 
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/509991/?series=110497&rev=1

but I am not intending to use it since it just reduces the frequency of 
failues, but the inherent issue still exists.

Regards,
Umesh

>>
>>In order to make the selftest more robust and account for such
>>latencies, increase the sample period to 100 ms.
>>
>>Signed-off-by: Umesh Nerlige Ramappa <umesh.nerlige.ramappa@intel.com>
>>---
>>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_engine_pm.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>>diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_engine_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_engine_pm.c
>>index 0dcb3ed44a73..87c94314cf67 100644
>>--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_engine_pm.c
>>+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_engine_pm.c
>>@@ -317,7 +317,7 @@ static int live_engine_busy_stats(void *arg)
>>  		ENGINE_TRACE(engine, "measuring busy time\n");
>>  		preempt_disable();
>>  		de = intel_engine_get_busy_time(engine, &t[0]);
>>-		mdelay(10);
>>+		mdelay(100);
>>  		de = ktime_sub(intel_engine_get_busy_time(engine, &t[1]), de);
>>  		preempt_enable();
>>  		dt = ktime_sub(t[1], t[0]);

  reply	other threads:[~2022-11-03 18:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-03  0:11 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/selftest: Bump up sample period for busy stats selftest Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2022-11-03  1:00 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success for " Patchwork
2022-11-03 12:13 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: " Patchwork
2022-11-03 12:28 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] " Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-11-03 18:08   ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa [this message]
2022-11-04  8:29     ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-11-04 14:58       ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2022-11-04 15:45         ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-11-03 17:01 ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2022-11-03 18:19   ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa

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=Y2QDsHVX9phoVfC3@unerlige-ril \
    --to=umesh.nerlige.ramappa@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
    /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