Intel-GFX Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
To: Ashutosh Dixit <ashutosh.dixit@intel.com>,
	intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 7/8] drm/i915/gt: Expose per-gt RPS defaults in sysfs
Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 08:53:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bdd33a4c-f0a9-1855-8c6b-c4895bbc363d@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e4c5f650a41fa7955c3ddabbb32846b3fafb3134.1651261886.git.ashutosh.dixit@intel.com>


On 29/04/2022 20:56, Ashutosh Dixit wrote:
> Create a gt/gtN/.defaults directory (similar to
> engine/<engine-name>/.defaults) to expose default parameter values for each
> gt in sysfs. Populate the .defaults directory with RPS parameter default
> values in order to allow userspace to revert to default values when needed.
> 
> This patch adds the following sysfs files to gt/gtN/.defaults:
> * default_min_freq_mhz
> * default_max_freq_mhz
> * default_boost_freq_mhz

Possibly an uninformed question - max will not be the existing rp0, min 
rpN, and boost I don't know?

>
> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ashutosh Dixit <ashutosh.dixit@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs.c    | 10 ++--
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs.h    |  6 +++
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs_pm.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h    | 10 ++++
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c         |  3 ++
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c | 17 +++++--
>   6 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs.c
> index 9e4ebf53379b..d651ccd0ab20 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs.c
> @@ -22,11 +22,6 @@ bool is_object_gt(struct kobject *kobj)
>   	return !strncmp(kobj->name, "gt", 2);
>   }
>   
> -static struct intel_gt *kobj_to_gt(struct kobject *kobj)
> -{
> -	return container_of(kobj, struct intel_gt, sysfs_gt);
> -}
> -
>   struct intel_gt *intel_gt_sysfs_get_drvdata(struct device *dev,
>   					    const char *name)
>   {
> @@ -101,6 +96,10 @@ void intel_gt_sysfs_register(struct intel_gt *gt)
>   				 gt->i915->sysfs_gt, "gt%d", gt->info.id))
>   		goto exit_fail;
>   
> +	gt->sysfs_defaults = kobject_create_and_add(".defaults", &gt->sysfs_gt);
> +	if (!gt->sysfs_defaults)
> +		goto exit_fail;
> +
>   	intel_gt_sysfs_pm_init(gt, &gt->sysfs_gt);
>   
>   	return;
> @@ -113,5 +112,6 @@ void intel_gt_sysfs_register(struct intel_gt *gt)
>   
>   void intel_gt_sysfs_unregister(struct intel_gt *gt)
>   {
> +	kobject_put(gt->sysfs_defaults);

Is this needed - won't below clean it up?

And not sure I am liking the mix of embedded and allocated kobjects.. 
Why we couldn't have it uniform?

>   	kobject_put(&gt->sysfs_gt);
>   }
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs.h
> index a99aa7e8b01a..6232923a420d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs.h
> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
>   #include <linux/kobject.h>
>   
>   #include "i915_gem.h" /* GEM_BUG_ON() */
> +#include "intel_gt_types.h"
>   
>   struct intel_gt;
>   
> @@ -22,6 +23,11 @@ intel_gt_create_kobj(struct intel_gt *gt,
>   		     struct kobject *dir,
>   		     const char *name);
>   
> +static inline struct intel_gt *kobj_to_gt(struct kobject *kobj)
> +{
> +	return container_of(kobj, struct intel_gt, sysfs_gt);
> +}
> +
>   void intel_gt_sysfs_register(struct intel_gt *gt);
>   void intel_gt_sysfs_unregister(struct intel_gt *gt);
>   struct intel_gt *intel_gt_sysfs_get_drvdata(struct device *dev,
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs_pm.c
> index ab91e9cf9deb..5a191973322e 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs_pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_sysfs_pm.c
> @@ -726,6 +726,51 @@ static const struct attribute *media_perf_power_attrs[] = {
>   	NULL
>   };
>   
> +static ssize_t
> +default_min_freq_mhz_show(struct kobject *kobj, struct kobj_attribute *attr, char *buf)
> +{
> +	struct intel_gt *gt = kobj_to_gt(kobj->parent);
> +
> +	return sysfs_emit(buf, "%d\n", gt->rps_defaults.min_freq);
> +}
> +
> +static struct kobj_attribute default_min_freq_mhz =
> +__ATTR(rps_min_freq_mhz, 0444, default_min_freq_mhz_show, NULL);
> +
> +static ssize_t
> +default_max_freq_mhz_show(struct kobject *kobj, struct kobj_attribute *attr, char *buf)
> +{
> +	struct intel_gt *gt = kobj_to_gt(kobj->parent);
> +
> +	return sysfs_emit(buf, "%d\n", gt->rps_defaults.max_freq);
> +}
> +
> +static struct kobj_attribute default_max_freq_mhz =
> +__ATTR(rps_max_freq_mhz, 0444, default_max_freq_mhz_show, NULL);
> +
> +static ssize_t
> +default_boost_freq_mhz_show(struct kobject *kobj, struct kobj_attribute *attr, char *buf)
> +{
> +	struct intel_gt *gt = kobj_to_gt(kobj->parent);
> +
> +	return sysfs_emit(buf, "%d\n", gt->rps_defaults.boost_freq);
> +}
> +
> +static struct kobj_attribute default_boost_freq_mhz =
> +__ATTR(rps_boost_freq_mhz, 0444, default_boost_freq_mhz_show, NULL);
> +
> +static const struct attribute * const rps_defaults_attrs[] = {
> +	&default_min_freq_mhz.attr,
> +	&default_max_freq_mhz.attr,
> +	&default_boost_freq_mhz.attr,
> +	NULL
> +};
> +
> +static int add_rps_defaults(struct intel_gt *gt)
> +{
> +	return sysfs_create_files(gt->sysfs_defaults, rps_defaults_attrs);
> +}
> +
>   static int intel_sysfs_rps_init(struct intel_gt *gt, struct kobject *kobj,
>   				const struct attribute * const *attrs)
>   {
> @@ -775,4 +820,10 @@ void intel_gt_sysfs_pm_init(struct intel_gt *gt, struct kobject *kobj)
>   				 "failed to create add gt%u media_perf_power_attrs sysfs (%pe)\n",
>   				 gt->info.id, ERR_PTR(ret));
>   	}
> +
> +	ret = add_rps_defaults(gt);
> +	if (ret)
> +		drm_warn(&gt->i915->drm,
> +			 "failed to add gt%u rps defaults (%pe)\n",
> +			 gt->info.id, ERR_PTR(ret));
>   }
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h
> index edd7a3cf5f5f..8b696669b846 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_gt_types.h
> @@ -62,6 +62,12 @@ enum intel_steering_type {
>   	NUM_STEERING_TYPES
>   };
>   
> +struct intel_rps_defaults {
> +	u32 min_freq;
> +	u32 max_freq;
> +	u32 boost_freq;
> +};
> +
>   enum intel_submission_method {
>   	INTEL_SUBMISSION_RING,
>   	INTEL_SUBMISSION_ELSP,
> @@ -227,6 +233,10 @@ struct intel_gt {
>   
>   	/* gt/gtN sysfs */
>   	struct kobject sysfs_gt;
> +
> +	/* sysfs defaults per gt */
> +	struct intel_rps_defaults rps_defaults;
> +	struct kobject *sysfs_defaults;
>   };
>   
>   enum intel_gt_scratch_field {
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c
> index 6b68b40ebff0..6f2461e12409 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c
> @@ -1976,7 +1976,9 @@ void intel_rps_init(struct intel_rps *rps)
>   
>   	/* Derive initial user preferences/limits from the hardware limits */
>   	rps->max_freq_softlimit = rps->max_freq;
> +	rps_to_gt(rps)->rps_defaults.max_freq = rps->max_freq_softlimit;
>   	rps->min_freq_softlimit = rps->min_freq;
> +	rps_to_gt(rps)->rps_defaults.min_freq = rps->min_freq_softlimit;
>   
>   	/* After setting max-softlimit, find the overclock max freq */
>   	if (GRAPHICS_VER(i915) == 6 || IS_IVYBRIDGE(i915) || IS_HASWELL(i915)) {
> @@ -1994,6 +1996,7 @@ void intel_rps_init(struct intel_rps *rps)
>   
>   	/* Finally allow us to boost to max by default */
>   	rps->boost_freq = rps->max_freq;
> +	rps_to_gt(rps)->rps_defaults.boost_freq = rps->boost_freq;
>   	rps->idle_freq = rps->min_freq;
>   
>   	/* Start in the middle, from here we will autotune based on workload */
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c
> index 2df31af70d63..cefd864c84eb 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c
> @@ -547,20 +547,24 @@ static int slpc_set_softlimits(struct intel_guc_slpc *slpc)
>   	 * unless they have deviated from defaults, in which case,
>   	 * we retain the values and set min/max accordingly.
>   	 */
> -	if (!slpc->max_freq_softlimit)
> +	if (!slpc->max_freq_softlimit) {
>   		slpc->max_freq_softlimit = slpc->rp0_freq;
> -	else if (slpc->max_freq_softlimit != slpc->rp0_freq)
> +		slpc_to_gt(slpc)->rps_defaults.max_freq = slpc->max_freq_softlimit;
> +	} else if (slpc->max_freq_softlimit != slpc->rp0_freq) {
>   		ret = intel_guc_slpc_set_max_freq(slpc,
>   						  slpc->max_freq_softlimit);
> +	}
>   
>   	if (unlikely(ret))
>   		return ret;
>   
> -	if (!slpc->min_freq_softlimit)
> +	if (!slpc->min_freq_softlimit) {
>   		slpc->min_freq_softlimit = slpc->min_freq;
> -	else if (slpc->min_freq_softlimit != slpc->min_freq)
> +		slpc_to_gt(slpc)->rps_defaults.min_freq = slpc->min_freq_softlimit;
> +	} else if (slpc->min_freq_softlimit != slpc->min_freq) {
>   		return intel_guc_slpc_set_min_freq(slpc,
>   						   slpc->min_freq_softlimit);
> +	}
>   
>   	return 0;
>   }
> @@ -606,8 +610,11 @@ static void slpc_get_rp_values(struct intel_guc_slpc *slpc)
>   	slpc->rp1_freq = intel_gpu_freq(rps, caps.rp1_freq);
>   	slpc->min_freq = intel_gpu_freq(rps, caps.min_freq);
>   
> -	if (!slpc->boost_freq)
> +	/* Boost freq is RP0, unless already set */
> +	if (!slpc->boost_freq) {
>   		slpc->boost_freq = slpc->rp0_freq;
> +		slpc_to_gt(slpc)->rps_defaults.boost_freq = slpc->boost_freq;
> +	}

Not liking that there are two places which set each of the default. Is 
it that there are GuC and non-GuC paths which initialize the parent 
struct? Is there a way to set the defaults at one common place after 
either branch has run?

Regards,

Tvrtko

>   }
>   
>   /*

  reply	other threads:[~2022-05-10  7:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-04-29 19:56 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 0/8] drm/i915: Media freq factor and per-gt enhancements/fixes Ashutosh Dixit
2022-04-29 19:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/8] drm/i915: Introduce has_media_ratio_mode Ashutosh Dixit
2022-04-29 19:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 2/8] drm/i915/gt: Add media freq factor to per-gt sysfs Ashutosh Dixit
2022-05-10  7:24   ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-05-12  4:25     ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2022-04-29 19:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 3/8] drm/i915/pcode: Extend pcode functions for multiple gt's Ashutosh Dixit
2022-05-02 12:54   ` Rodrigo Vivi
2022-05-10  6:51   ` Andi Shyti
2022-05-10  7:34   ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-05-10  7:43     ` Jani Nikula
2022-05-11  5:26       ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2022-05-11  8:18         ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-05-12  4:28           ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2022-04-29 19:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 4/8] drm/i915/pcode: Add a couple of pcode helpers Ashutosh Dixit
2022-04-29 19:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 5/8] drm/i915/gt: Add media RP0/RPn to per-gt sysfs Ashutosh Dixit
2022-05-10  7:37   ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-05-12  4:25     ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2022-04-29 19:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 6/8] drm/i915/gt: Fix memory leaks in " Ashutosh Dixit
2022-05-10  6:02   ` Andi Shyti
2022-05-10  7:28   ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-05-10  7:58     ` Andrzej Hajda
2022-05-10  8:18       ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-05-10  9:39         ` Andrzej Hajda
2022-05-10  9:48           ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-05-10 10:41             ` Andrzej Hajda
2022-05-10 13:25               ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-05-11 23:15               ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2022-05-12  7:48                 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-05-13  5:05                   ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2022-05-13  9:28                     ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2022-04-29 19:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 7/8] drm/i915/gt: Expose per-gt RPS defaults in sysfs Ashutosh Dixit
2022-05-10  7:53   ` Tvrtko Ursulin [this message]
2022-05-10 10:58     ` Andi Shyti
2022-05-26 19:10       ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2022-05-26 19:09     ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2022-04-29 19:56 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 8/8] drm/i915/gt: Expose default value for media_freq_factor in per-gt sysfs Ashutosh Dixit
2022-04-29 20:37 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.CHECKPATCH: warning for drm/i915: Media freq factor and per-gt enhancements/fixes (rev4) Patchwork
2022-04-29 20:37 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.SPARSE: " Patchwork
2022-04-29 21:10 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2022-04-29 23:38 ` [Intel-gfx] ✗ Fi.CI.IGT: failure " Patchwork
2022-04-30  0:44   ` Dixit, Ashutosh
2022-04-30  5:28     ` Vudum, Lakshminarayana
2022-04-30  5:09 ` [Intel-gfx] ✓ Fi.CI.IGT: success " Patchwork
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-04-13 18:11 [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0/8] drm/i915: Media freq factor and per-gt enhancements/fixes Ashutosh Dixit
2022-04-13 18:11 ` [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 7/8] drm/i915/gt: Expose per-gt RPS defaults in sysfs Ashutosh Dixit

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=bdd33a4c-f0a9-1855-8c6b-c4895bbc363d@linux.intel.com \
    --to=tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=ashutosh.dixit@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.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