[PATCH v2] drm/msm: add trace_dma_fence_emit to msm_gpu_submit

[Christian König]

Am 26.04.22 um 19:05 schrieb Rob Clark:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 9:42 AM Christian König
> <christian.koenig at amd.com> wrote:
>> Am 26.04.22 um 18:32 schrieb Chia-I Wu:
>>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 2:26 PM Chia-I Wu <olvaffe at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> In practice, trace_dma_fence_init called from dma_fence_init is good
>>>> enough and almost no driver calls trace_dma_fence_emit.  But drm_sched
>>>> and virtio both have cases where trace_dma_fence_init and
>>>> trace_dma_fence_emit can be apart.  It is easier for visualization tools
>>>> to always use the more correct trace_dma_fence_emit when visualizing
>>>> fence timelines.
>>>>
>>>> v2: improve commit message (Dmitry)
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Chia-I Wu <olvaffe at gmail.com>
>>>> Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark at chromium.org>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov at linaro.org>
>>> This has been reviewed.  Should we land it?
>> No, there are still open discussions about it.
> I think if it is needed for trace visualization, that is justification
> enough for me
>
> I don't really see otherwise how a generic trace visualization tool
> like perfetto would handle the case that some fence timelines have
> separate events but others do not.

Well I just send a patch to completely remove the trace point.

As I said it absolutely doesn't make sense to use this for 
visualization, that's what the trace_dma_fence_init trace point is good for.

The only use case is for debugging the GPU scheduler and we should 
probably introduce a separate GPU scheduler specific trace point for 
this instead if we should ever need it.

Regards,
Christian.

>
> BR,
> -R
>
>> Regards,
>> Christian.
>>
>>> (Or, how do I check if it has landed?)