[Intel-gfx] intel_gpu_top profiles
eric at anholt.net
Fri Oct 30 19:25:14 CET 2009
On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 12:29 +0000, Peter Clifton wrote:
> Hi guys..
> intel_gpu_top seemed like it has been a well kept secret.. I discovered
> it today, and took some profiles of the circuit board layout package I'm
> working on.
> Can anyone suggest whether there appears to be "room for improvement"? I
> couldn't spot any obvious bottle-neck. I'm surprised that the pixel
> shader is seeing any use, (even without compiz), as I'm just using
> boring fixed-function stuff with no texturing, no lighting, nothing
I'd been meaning to type this up for a while, and your mail convinced me
to do so. Here's a new wiki page:
Does this help? Are there parts that are unclear and confusing?
> Screen-captures of the profiles available here:
OK, so this shows that the GPU is almost entirely idle, time to pull out
perf and see what's going wrong.
> The "displaylist" versions are where I get the rendering code to build
> all its rendering into a single displaylist, then just draw the
> display-list from the expose event handler. (Prodded repeatedly by our
> "benchmark" action).
> The "no_displaylist" versions show what happens with our geometry
> generation overheads in place - obviously there is room for improvement
> in that case!
If you're using VBOs, no_displaylist should beat displaylist.
Otherwise, what a display list performance win probably means is that
you're getting VBOs made for you.
> What is "MASM CS CR" and "CL CS"? Those seem to vary in the compiz /
> non-compiz case. Is there a guide with these names somewhere (other than
> the GPU PRM?)
If we know what the names mean, we should improve the names in the
tool :) Those came straight out of the docs.
eric at anholt.net eric.anholt at intel.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the Intel-gfx