From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75E55E77180 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 08:53:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 098B010E823; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 08:53:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: gabe.freedesktop.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="ICdhUhwy"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.17]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81C7010E823 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 08:53:15 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1733820796; x=1765356796; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=E1kLQUoEOLHBwni99nWmMisADj9SR4vzS1KB/2QCtQQ=; b=ICdhUhwyrrTAR+KMSOcJwPhjPc6ZYDGCP0lkYidWQsPN6sz2ZkEfeUiT DxV7JpI6F61Zfa0edpHhR+a5b1sUMjzcvvmiqA1+NhelFYyhEeiTmw5bG 1wZYdngbZfE64dJcw7JAuIoX7qwH8XIsfckBothUuBNviP/c8ZG54X+88 mmfBQm5a1j1VXpamwPQPsKDXg1nWI6+VZS2nW5rN99p/G16rTgIpJFywU VWV3isZfq/yRuFMgB+TSO5EHOQxq3SaXnHMjHit46G86z32CRTqo58JSD ugcmsCwtOuQ3Kh2oWGJJdzli/scrqMvR6kWAiF5ImUWWO+vntuNiqktNA Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: KiPQGg+zS3W+Msj2yWtG9g== X-CSE-MsgGUID: kQuMOpk7TbG6pfUlsJtxmg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11281"; a="34205844" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.12,222,1728975600"; d="scan'208";a="34205844" Received: from fmviesa003.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.143]) by orvoesa109.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Dec 2024 00:53:15 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: vE8iBRQLSpu7cnxZsU/b5A== X-CSE-MsgGUID: Tl8KDoe2RLyDw5yZ+8rpWg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.12,222,1728975600"; d="scan'208";a="99402871" Received: from black.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.28]) by fmviesa003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Dec 2024 00:53:13 -0800 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:53:10 +0200 From: Raag Jadav To: Rodrigo Vivi Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, anshuman.gupta@intel.com, chris.p.wilson@linux.intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] drm/i915/selftest: Log throttle reasons on failure Message-ID: References: <20241205081413.1529252-1-raag.jadav@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel graphics driver community testing & development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 11:28:39AM -0500, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > On Sat, Dec 07, 2024 at 08:14:42AM +0200, Raag Jadav wrote: > > Cc: Chris > > > > On Fri, Dec 06, 2024 at 10:45:18AM -0500, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 01:44:13PM +0530, Raag Jadav wrote: > > > > Log throttle reasons on selftest failure which will be useful for > > > > debugging. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Raag Jadav > > > > --- > > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c | 7 +++++-- > > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c > > > > index dcef8d498919..1e0e59bc69b6 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/selftest_rps.c > > > > @@ -478,8 +478,11 @@ int live_rps_control(void *arg) > > > > min, max, ktime_to_ns(min_dt), ktime_to_ns(max_dt)); > > > > > > > > if (limit == rps->min_freq) { > > > > > > I was going to merge this, but then I noticed that this prints only > > > when the throttle moves that to our min_freq... When PCODE throttle > > > the freq, the guaranteed freq can be at any point, not necessarily > > > to the minimal, so this print is not very effective in the end of the day > > > > Makes me wonder why such a criteria at all? > > very good question... > Perhaps we need to revamp entirely this selftest or kill it? Depends. Do we qualify throttling as a failure? If yes, we'll keep hitting this every now and then. If no, then just dropping this condition might be enough. Raag > > > > - pr_err("%s: GPU throttled to minimum!\n", > > > > - engine->name); > > > > + u32 throttle = intel_uncore_read(gt->uncore, > > > > + intel_gt_perf_limit_reasons_reg(gt)); > > > > + > > > > + pr_err("%s: GPU throttled to minimum frequency with reasons 0x%08x\n", > > > > + engine->name, throttle & GT0_PERF_LIMIT_REASONS_MASK); > > > > show_pstate_limits(rps); > > > > err = -ENODEV; > > > > break; > > > > -- > > > > 2.34.1 > > > >