[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v4 4/4] drm/i915: Additional request structure tracing
John.C.Harrison at Intel.com
John.C.Harrison at Intel.com
Fri Dec 5 05:49:36 PST 2014
From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison at Intel.com>
Added the request structure's 'uniq' identifier to the trace information. Also
renamed the '_complete' trace event to '_notify' as it actually happens in the
IRQ 'notify_ring()' function. The intention is to add a new '_complete' trace
event which occurs when a request structure is actually marked as complete.
However, at the moment the completion status is re-tested every time the query
is made so there isn't a completion event as such.
v2: New patch added to series.
v3: Rebased to remove completion caching as that is apparently contentious.
Change-Id: Ic9bcde67d175c6c03b96217cdcb6e4cc4aa45d67
For: VIZ-4377
Signed-off-by: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison at Intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Daniel <Thomas.Daniel at intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_trace.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
index 7913a72..08a5a4b 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_irq.c
@@ -1013,7 +1013,7 @@ static void notify_ring(struct drm_device *dev,
if (!intel_ring_initialized(ring))
return;
- trace_i915_gem_request_complete(ring);
+ trace_i915_gem_request_notify(ring);
wake_up_all(&ring->irq_queue);
}
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_trace.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_trace.h
index 2ade958..6058a01 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_trace.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_trace.h
@@ -406,6 +406,7 @@ DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(i915_gem_request,
TP_STRUCT__entry(
__field(u32, dev)
__field(u32, ring)
+ __field(u32, uniq)
__field(u32, seqno)
),
@@ -414,11 +415,13 @@ DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(i915_gem_request,
i915_gem_request_get_ring(req);
__entry->dev = ring->dev->primary->index;
__entry->ring = ring->id;
+ __entry->uniq = req ? req->uniq : 0;
__entry->seqno = i915_gem_request_get_seqno(req);
),
- TP_printk("dev=%u, ring=%u, seqno=%u",
- __entry->dev, __entry->ring, __entry->seqno)
+ TP_printk("dev=%u, ring=%u, uniq=%u, seqno=%u",
+ __entry->dev, __entry->ring, __entry->uniq,
+ __entry->seqno)
);
DEFINE_EVENT(i915_gem_request, i915_gem_request_add,
@@ -426,7 +429,7 @@ DEFINE_EVENT(i915_gem_request, i915_gem_request_add,
TP_ARGS(req)
);
-TRACE_EVENT(i915_gem_request_complete,
+TRACE_EVENT(i915_gem_request_notify,
TP_PROTO(struct intel_engine_cs *ring),
TP_ARGS(ring),
@@ -451,6 +454,11 @@ DEFINE_EVENT(i915_gem_request, i915_gem_request_retire,
TP_ARGS(req)
);
+DEFINE_EVENT(i915_gem_request, i915_gem_request_complete,
+ TP_PROTO(struct drm_i915_gem_request *req),
+ TP_ARGS(req)
+);
+
TRACE_EVENT(i915_gem_request_wait_begin,
TP_PROTO(struct drm_i915_gem_request *req),
TP_ARGS(req),
@@ -458,6 +466,7 @@ TRACE_EVENT(i915_gem_request_wait_begin,
TP_STRUCT__entry(
__field(u32, dev)
__field(u32, ring)
+ __field(u32, uniq)
__field(u32, seqno)
__field(bool, blocking)
),
@@ -473,14 +482,15 @@ TRACE_EVENT(i915_gem_request_wait_begin,
i915_gem_request_get_ring(req);
__entry->dev = ring->dev->primary->index;
__entry->ring = ring->id;
+ __entry->uniq = req ? req->uniq : 0;
__entry->seqno = i915_gem_request_get_seqno(req);
__entry->blocking =
mutex_is_locked(&ring->dev->struct_mutex);
),
- TP_printk("dev=%u, ring=%u, seqno=%u, blocking=%s",
- __entry->dev, __entry->ring, __entry->seqno,
- __entry->blocking ? "yes (NB)" : "no")
+ TP_printk("dev=%u, ring=%u, uniq=%u, seqno=%u, blocking=%s",
+ __entry->dev, __entry->ring, __entry->uniq,
+ __entry->seqno, __entry->blocking ? "yes (NB)" : "no")
);
DEFINE_EVENT(i915_gem_request, i915_gem_request_wait_end,
--
1.7.9.5
More information about the Intel-gfx
mailing list