[igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t v2] intel_gpu_top: Hide unused clients

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2021-02-01 09:53:20)
> 
> On 01/02/2021 09:31, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Hide inactive clients by pressing 'i' (toggle in interactive mode).
> > 
> > v2: Fix location of filter_idle.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >   tools/intel_gpu_top.c | 9 +++++++++
> >   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tools/intel_gpu_top.c b/tools/intel_gpu_top.c
> > index 60ff62d28..d88b6cc61 100644
> > --- a/tools/intel_gpu_top.c
> > +++ b/tools/intel_gpu_top.c
> > @@ -1595,6 +1595,7 @@ print_imc(struct engines *engines, double t, int lines, int con_w, int con_h)
> >   }
> >   
> >   static bool class_view;
> > +static bool filter_idle;
> >   
> >   static int
> >   print_engines_header(struct engines *engines, double t,
> > @@ -2115,6 +2116,9 @@ static void process_stdin(unsigned int timeout_us)
> >               case 'q':
> >                       stop_top = true;
> >                       break;
> > +             case 'i':
> > +                     filter_idle ^= true;
> > +                     break;
> >               case '1':
> >                       class_view ^= true;
> >                       break;
> > @@ -2323,9 +2327,14 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
> >   
> >                               for_each_client(clients, c, j) {
> >                                       assert(c->status != PROBE);
> > +
> >                                       if (c->status != ALIVE)
> >                                               break; /* Active clients are first in the array. */
> >   
> > +                                     /* Active clients before idle */
> > +                                     if (filter_idle && !c->total_runtime)
> > +                                             break;
> > +
> 
> Break won't be correct for id sort. I don't see what did not work with 
> v1? It should be effectively the same apart from the break.

We didn't the client to peek into.

Maybe you want to do v3 :)
-Chris