[Intel-gfx] [CI 4/6] drm/i915/gt: Switch to manual evaluation of RPS

[Chris Wilson]

Quoting Rodrigo Vivi (2020-05-06 15:44:48)
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 09:54:44PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > As with the realisation for soft-rc6, we respond to idling the engines
> > within microseconds, far faster than the response times for HW RC6 and
> > RPS. Furthermore, our fast parking upon idle, prevents HW RPS from
> > running for many desktop workloads, as the RPS evaluation intervals are
> > on the order of tens of milliseconds, but the typical workload is just a
> > couple of milliseconds, but yet we still need to determine the best
> > frequency for user latency versus power.
> > 
> > Recognising that the HW evaluation intervals are a poor fit, and that
> > they were deprecated [in bspec at least] from gen10, start to wean
> > ourselves off them and replace the EI with a timer and our accurate
> > busy-stats. The principle benefit of manually evaluating RPS intervals
> > is that we can be more responsive for better performance and powersaving
> > for both spiky workloads and steady-state.
> > 
> > Closes: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/1698
> > Fixes: 98479ada421a ("drm/i915/gt: Treat idling as a RPS downclock event")
> 
> Hi Chris,
> 
> this one failed to apply on drm-intel-fixes and it looks critical
> to me... I attempted some cherry-pick and backport of other patches
> on this series, but they took me to other dependencies and many
> apparently non-trivial fixes.

It's the entire series. It's a UX regression rather than power, so it
could slip, and I would err on the side of caution as it is quite a
dramatic change to throw in late into a 5.7-rc. There's going to be no
user feedback on it until it is in the rc, by which point we have no
time to fix it.

> So, do we have a solution for this that we could apply for 5.7?
> Or the faith of 5.7 is also the part faster solution?
> 
> Btw, there are other patches on the list of failed cherry-picks:
> 
> 614654abe847 ("drm/i915: Check current i915_vma.pin_count status first on unbind")

We need that to fix a deadlock.

> c4e8ba739034 ("drm/i915/gt: Yield the timeslice if caught waiting on a user semaphore")

That to behave nicely with VkEvents.

> a95f3ac21d64 ("drm/i915/gem: Remove object_is_locked assertion from unpin_from_display_plane")

And that's a potential bug in 5.7, so needs fixing.

> 2632f174a2e1 ("drm/i915/execlists: Avoid reusing the same logical CCID")
> 5c4a53e3b1cb ("drm/i915/execlists: Track inflight CCID")

We probably need these based on our presumption of how the HW might
work.
> 
> do you have any updated ickle/dif branch available?

Will do.
-Chris