[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 27/27] drm/i915/scheduler: Support user-defined priorities

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 19/04/2017 11:09, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:41:43AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>> index f43a22ae955b..200f2cf393b2 100644
>> --- a/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>> +++ b/include/uapi/drm/i915_drm.h
>> @@ -395,6 +395,8 @@ typedef struct drm_i915_irq_wait {
>>
>>  /* Query whether DRM_I915_GEM_EXECBUFFER2 supports user defined execution
>>   * priorities and the driver will attempt to execute batches in priority order.
>> + * The initial priority for each batch is supplied by the context and is
>> + * controlled via I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PRIORITY.
>>   */
>>  #define I915_PARAM_HAS_SCHEDULER	 41
>>  #define I915_PARAM_HUC_STATUS		 42
>> @@ -1318,6 +1320,7 @@ struct drm_i915_gem_context_param {
>>  #define I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_GTT_SIZE	0x3
>>  #define I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_NO_ERROR_CAPTURE	0x4
>>  #define I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_BANNABLE	0x5
>> +#define I915_CONTEXT_PARAM_PRIORITY	0x6
>
> Grr. Forgot to add min/max defines.
>
> #define I915_CONTEXT_MAX_USER_PRIORITY		1023 /* inclusive */
> #define I915_CONTEXT_DEFAULT_PRIORITY		0
> #define I915_CONTEXT_MIN_USER_PRIORITY		-1023 /* inclusive */

Yes, and use these in context get param, including the default instead 
of the zero I think.

> Or should it be I915_CONTEXT_PRIORITY_MAX_USER etc?

Priority last somehow looks better to me since like that it is clearly a 
separate category from param names. But I don't mind either way.

Regards,

Tvrtko