[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Default to more lenient force preempt timeout

[Joonas Lahtinen]

+ Jason/Ken for Mesa feedback (please look at Bugzilla discussion)

Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2019-11-26 11:32:42)
> 
> On 25/11/2019 16:27, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > Based on a sampling of a number of benchmarks across platforms, by
> > default opt for a more much lenient timeout so that we should not
> > adversely affect existing clients.
> > 
> > 640ms ought to be enough for anyone.
> > 
> > Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112169
> > Fixes: 3a7a92aba8fb ("drm/i915/execlists: Force preemption")
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen at linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Eero Tamminen <eero.t.tamminen at intel.com>
> > Cc: Dmitry Rogozhkin <dmitry.v.rogozhkin at intel.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Kconfig.profile | 2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Kconfig.profile b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Kconfig.profile
> > index 1799537a3228..c280b6ae38eb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Kconfig.profile
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Kconfig.profile
> > @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ config DRM_I915_HEARTBEAT_INTERVAL
> >   
> >   config DRM_I915_PREEMPT_TIMEOUT
> >       int "Preempt timeout (ms, jiffy granularity)"
> > -     default 100 # milliseconds
> > +     default 640 # milliseconds

Maybe just bump to 1000 ms for a good measure.

640 ms is already a radical stall.

Regards, Joonas

> >       help
> >         How long to wait (in milliseconds) for a preemption event to occur
> >         when submitting a new context via execlists. If the current context
> > 
> 
> If it's needed it's needed.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at intel.com>
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Tvrtko
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx