| Message ID | 20171218153520.14181-4-lionel.g.landwerlin@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 18/12/2017 15:35, Lionel Landwerlin wrote: > While the end goal is to make this information available to userspace > through a new ioctl, there is no reason we can't display it in a human > readable fashion through debugfs. > > slice0 (subslice_mask=0x7): I'd add a subslice count while at it, since the eu lines have counts. Bike-shedding on whether counts or masks are typically more important? Slice0: 3 slices (0x7): Subslice 0: 8 EUs (0xff) Subslice 1: 8 EUs (0xff) ... ? > subslice0: > eu_mask: 0xff (8) > subslice1: > eu_mask: 0xff (8) > subslice2: > eu_mask: 0xff (8) > subslice3: > eu_mask: 0x0 (0) > slice1 (subslice_mask=0x7): > subslice0: > eu_mask: 0xff (8) > subslice1: > eu_mask: 0xff (8) > subslice2: > eu_mask: 0xff (8) > subslice3: > eu_mask: 0x0 (0) > slice2 (subslice_mask=0x7): > subslice0: > eu_mask: 0xff (8) > subslice1: > eu_mask: 0xff (8) > subslice2: > eu_mask: 0xff (8) > subslice3: > eu_mask: 0x0 (0) > > Suggested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> > Signed-off-by: Lionel Landwerlin <lionel.g.landwerlin@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > index 6ec7543e698f..79ca6e9f9ec9 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c > @@ -3173,6 +3173,42 @@ static int i915_engine_info(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) > return 0; > } > > +static int i915_rcs_topology(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) > +{ > + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = node_to_i915(m->private); > + const struct sseu_dev_info *sseu = &INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->sseu; > + int s, ss; > + int subslice_stride = ALIGN(sseu->max_eus_per_subslice, 8) / 8; > + int slice_stride = sseu->max_subslices * subslice_stride; Another case for the before mentioned helper for indexing into eu_mask array? > + > + if (sseu->max_slices == 0) { > + seq_printf(m, "Unavailable\n"); > + return 0; > + } Is this possible? > + > + for (s = 0; s < sseu->max_slices; s++) { > + seq_printf(m, "slice%i (subslice_mask=0x%x):\n", %i always confuses me. Googling shows it is equivalent to %d for printing? Or is it something different in kernel space? If it is equivalent I would go with a more standard one. And I would even change to unsigned variables for iterators but I realize some people have a different opinion so up to you. > + s, sseu->subslices_mask[s]); > + > + for (ss = 0; ss < slice_stride / subslice_stride; ss++) { With the indexing helpers hopefully it would be possible to simply iterate to hweight8(sseu->sublice_mask[s]) ? > + int eu, n_subslice_eus = 0; > + > + seq_printf(m, "\tsubslice%i:\n", ss); > + > + seq_printf(m, "\t\teu_mask:"); > + for (eu = 0; eu < subslice_stride; eu++) { > + u8 val = sseu->eu_mask[s * slice_stride + > + ss * subslice_stride + eu]; > + seq_printf(m, " 0x%x", val); > + n_subslice_eus += hweight8(val); > + } > + seq_printf(m, " (%i)\n", n_subslice_eus); > + } > + } > + > + return 0; > +} > + > static int i915_shrinker_info(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) > { > struct drm_i915_private *i915 = node_to_i915(m->private); > @@ -4658,6 +4694,7 @@ static const struct drm_info_list i915_debugfs_list[] = { > {"i915_dmc_info", i915_dmc_info, 0}, > {"i915_display_info", i915_display_info, 0}, > {"i915_engine_info", i915_engine_info, 0}, > + {"i915_rcs_topology", i915_rcs_topology, 0}, > {"i915_shrinker_info", i915_shrinker_info, 0}, > {"i915_shared_dplls_info", i915_shared_dplls_info, 0}, > {"i915_dp_mst_info", i915_dp_mst_info, 0}, > Regards, Tvrtko
On 11/01/18 11:31, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > On 18/12/2017 15:35, Lionel Landwerlin wrote: >> While the end goal is to make this information available to userspace >> through a new ioctl, there is no reason we can't display it in a human >> readable fashion through debugfs. >> >> slice0 (subslice_mask=0x7): > > I'd add a subslice count while at it, since the eu lines have counts. > > Bike-shedding on whether counts or masks are typically more important? > > Slice0: 3 slices (0x7): > Subslice 0: 8 EUs (0xff) > Subslice 1: 8 EUs (0xff) > ... > > ? Yeah, sure. > >> subslice0: >> eu_mask: 0xff (8) >> subslice1: >> eu_mask: 0xff (8) >> subslice2: >> eu_mask: 0xff (8) >> subslice3: >> eu_mask: 0x0 (0) >> slice1 (subslice_mask=0x7): >> subslice0: >> eu_mask: 0xff (8) >> subslice1: >> eu_mask: 0xff (8) >> subslice2: >> eu_mask: 0xff (8) >> subslice3: >> eu_mask: 0x0 (0) >> slice2 (subslice_mask=0x7): >> subslice0: >> eu_mask: 0xff (8) >> subslice1: >> eu_mask: 0xff (8) >> subslice2: >> eu_mask: 0xff (8) >> subslice3: >> eu_mask: 0x0 (0) >> >> Suggested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> >> Signed-off-by: Lionel Landwerlin <lionel.g.landwerlin@intel.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 37 >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c >> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c >> index 6ec7543e698f..79ca6e9f9ec9 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c >> @@ -3173,6 +3173,42 @@ static int i915_engine_info(struct seq_file >> *m, void *unused) >> return 0; >> } >> +static int i915_rcs_topology(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) >> +{ >> + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = node_to_i915(m->private); >> + const struct sseu_dev_info *sseu = &INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->sseu; >> + int s, ss; >> + int subslice_stride = ALIGN(sseu->max_eus_per_subslice, 8) / 8; >> + int slice_stride = sseu->max_subslices * subslice_stride; > > Another case for the before mentioned helper for indexing into eu_mask > array? Done. > >> + >> + if (sseu->max_slices == 0) { >> + seq_printf(m, "Unavailable\n"); >> + return 0; >> + } > > Is this possible? Yeah, there are no registers to read on anything < gen8. I've decided not to generate data there. Most userspaces already has the numbers from a table by pci-id. > >> + >> + for (s = 0; s < sseu->max_slices; s++) { >> + seq_printf(m, "slice%i (subslice_mask=0x%x):\n", > > %i always confuses me. Googling shows it is equivalent to %d for > printing? Or is it something different in kernel space? If it is > equivalent I would go with a more standard one. And I would even > change to unsigned variables for iterators but I realize some people > have a different opinion so up to you. Yeah, I'm always using %i, but I must be the only one. It's been easier to remember int -> %i. > >> + s, sseu->subslices_mask[s]); >> + >> + for (ss = 0; ss < slice_stride / subslice_stride; ss++) { > > With the indexing helpers hopefully it would be possible to simply > iterate to hweight8(sseu->sublice_mask[s]) ? Actually I should use sseu->max_subslices. > >> + int eu, n_subslice_eus = 0; >> + >> + seq_printf(m, "\tsubslice%i:\n", ss); >> + >> + seq_printf(m, "\t\teu_mask:"); >> + for (eu = 0; eu < subslice_stride; eu++) { >> + u8 val = sseu->eu_mask[s * slice_stride + >> + ss * subslice_stride + eu]; >> + seq_printf(m, " 0x%x", val); >> + n_subslice_eus += hweight8(val); >> + } >> + seq_printf(m, " (%i)\n", n_subslice_eus); >> + } >> + } >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> static int i915_shrinker_info(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) >> { >> struct drm_i915_private *i915 = node_to_i915(m->private); >> @@ -4658,6 +4694,7 @@ static const struct drm_info_list >> i915_debugfs_list[] = { >> {"i915_dmc_info", i915_dmc_info, 0}, >> {"i915_display_info", i915_display_info, 0}, >> {"i915_engine_info", i915_engine_info, 0}, >> + {"i915_rcs_topology", i915_rcs_topology, 0}, >> {"i915_shrinker_info", i915_shrinker_info, 0}, >> {"i915_shared_dplls_info", i915_shared_dplls_info, 0}, >> {"i915_dp_mst_info", i915_dp_mst_info, 0}, >> > > Regards, > > Tvrtko >
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c index 6ec7543e698f..79ca6e9f9ec9 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c @@ -3173,6 +3173,42 @@ static int i915_engine_info(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) return 0; } +static int i915_rcs_topology(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) +{ + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = node_to_i915(m->private); + const struct sseu_dev_info *sseu = &INTEL_INFO(dev_priv)->sseu; + int s, ss; + int subslice_stride = ALIGN(sseu->max_eus_per_subslice, 8) / 8; + int slice_stride = sseu->max_subslices * subslice_stride; + + if (sseu->max_slices == 0) { + seq_printf(m, "Unavailable\n"); + return 0; + } + + for (s = 0; s < sseu->max_slices; s++) { + seq_printf(m, "slice%i (subslice_mask=0x%x):\n", + s, sseu->subslices_mask[s]); + + for (ss = 0; ss < slice_stride / subslice_stride; ss++) { + int eu, n_subslice_eus = 0; + + seq_printf(m, "\tsubslice%i:\n", ss); + + seq_printf(m, "\t\teu_mask:"); + for (eu = 0; eu < subslice_stride; eu++) { + u8 val = sseu->eu_mask[s * slice_stride + + ss * subslice_stride + eu]; + seq_printf(m, " 0x%x", val); + n_subslice_eus += hweight8(val); + } + seq_printf(m, " (%i)\n", n_subslice_eus); + } + } + + return 0; +} + static int i915_shrinker_info(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) { struct drm_i915_private *i915 = node_to_i915(m->private); @@ -4658,6 +4694,7 @@ static const struct drm_info_list i915_debugfs_list[] = { {"i915_dmc_info", i915_dmc_info, 0}, {"i915_display_info", i915_display_info, 0}, {"i915_engine_info", i915_engine_info, 0}, + {"i915_rcs_topology", i915_rcs_topology, 0}, {"i915_shrinker_info", i915_shrinker_info, 0}, {"i915_shared_dplls_info", i915_shared_dplls_info, 0}, {"i915_dp_mst_info", i915_dp_mst_info, 0},
While the end goal is to make this information available to userspace through a new ioctl, there is no reason we can't display it in a human readable fashion through debugfs. slice0 (subslice_mask=0x7): subslice0: eu_mask: 0xff (8) subslice1: eu_mask: 0xff (8) subslice2: eu_mask: 0xff (8) subslice3: eu_mask: 0x0 (0) slice1 (subslice_mask=0x7): subslice0: eu_mask: 0xff (8) subslice1: eu_mask: 0xff (8) subslice2: eu_mask: 0xff (8) subslice3: eu_mask: 0x0 (0) slice2 (subslice_mask=0x7): subslice0: eu_mask: 0xff (8) subslice1: eu_mask: 0xff (8) subslice2: eu_mask: 0xff (8) subslice3: eu_mask: 0x0 (0) Suggested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Lionel Landwerlin <lionel.g.landwerlin@intel.com> --- drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+)