[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/guc/slpc: Allow SLPC to use efficient frequency

Rodrigo Vivi rodrigo.vivi at intel.com
Mon Aug 15 17:32:23 UTC 2022


On Sun, Aug 14, 2022 at 04:46:54PM -0700, Vinay Belgaumkar wrote:
> Host Turbo operates at efficient frequency when GT is not idle unless
> the user or workload has forced it to a higher level. Replicate the same
> behavior in SLPC by allowing the algorithm to use efficient frequency.
> We had disabled it during boot due to concerns that it might break
> kernel ABI for min frequency. However, this is not the case since
> SLPC will still abide by the (min,max) range limits.
> 
> With this change, min freq will be at efficient frequency level at init
> instead of fused min (RPn). If user chooses to reduce min freq below the
> efficient freq, we will turn off usage of efficient frequency and honor
> the user request. When a higher value is written, it will get toggled
> back again.
> 
> The patch also corrects the register which needs to be read for obtaining
> the correct efficient frequency for Gen9+.
> 
> We see much better perf numbers with benchmarks like glmark2 with
> efficient frequency usage enabled as expected.
> 
> BugLink: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/intel/-/issues/5468
> 
> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>

First of all sorry for looking to the old patch first... I was delayed in my inbox flow.

> Signed-off-by: Vinay Belgaumkar <vinay.belgaumkar at intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c         |  3 +
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c | 66 +++++++++++----------
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_mchbar_regs.h    |  3 +
>  3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c
> index c7d381ad90cf..281a086fc265 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/intel_rps.c
> @@ -1108,6 +1108,9 @@ void gen6_rps_get_freq_caps(struct intel_rps *rps, struct intel_rps_freq_caps *c
>  	} else {
>  		caps->rp0_freq = (rp_state_cap >>  0) & 0xff;
>  		caps->rp1_freq = (rp_state_cap >>  8) & 0xff;
> +		caps->rp1_freq = REG_FIELD_GET(RPE_MASK,
> +					       intel_uncore_read(to_gt(i915)->uncore,
> +					       GEN10_FREQ_INFO_REC));

This register is only gen10+ while the func is gen6+.
either we handle the platform properly or we create a new rpe_freq tracker somewhere
and if that's available we use this rpe, otherwise we use the hw fused rp1 which is a good
enough, but it is not the actual one resolved by pcode, like this new RPe one.

>  		caps->min_freq = (rp_state_cap >> 16) & 0xff;
>  	}
>  
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c
> index e1fa1f32f29e..70a2af5f518d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_slpc.c
> @@ -465,6 +465,29 @@ int intel_guc_slpc_get_max_freq(struct intel_guc_slpc *slpc, u32 *val)
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static int slpc_ignore_eff_freq(struct intel_guc_slpc *slpc, bool ignore)

I know this code was already there, but I do have some questions around this
and maybe we can simplify now that are touching this function.

> +{
> +	int ret = 0;
> +
> +	if (ignore) {
> +		ret = slpc_set_param(slpc,
> +				     SLPC_PARAM_IGNORE_EFFICIENT_FREQUENCY,
> +				     ignore);
> +		if (!ret)
> +			return slpc_set_param(slpc,
> +					      SLPC_PARAM_GLOBAL_MIN_GT_UNSLICE_FREQ_MHZ,
> +					      slpc->min_freq);

why do we need to touch this min request here?

> +	} else {
> +		ret = slpc_unset_param(slpc,
> +				       SLPC_PARAM_IGNORE_EFFICIENT_FREQUENCY);

do we really need the unset param?

for me using set_param(SLPC_PARAM_IGNORE_EFFICIENT_FREQUENCY, freq < rpe_freq)
was enough...

> +		if (!ret)
> +			return slpc_unset_param(slpc,
> +						SLPC_PARAM_GLOBAL_MIN_GT_UNSLICE_FREQ_MHZ);
> +	}
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * intel_guc_slpc_set_min_freq() - Set min frequency limit for SLPC.
>   * @slpc: pointer to intel_guc_slpc.
> @@ -491,6 +514,14 @@ int intel_guc_slpc_set_min_freq(struct intel_guc_slpc *slpc, u32 val)
>  
>  	with_intel_runtime_pm(&i915->runtime_pm, wakeref) {
>  
> +		/* Ignore efficient freq if lower min freq is requested */
> +		ret = slpc_ignore_eff_freq(slpc, val < slpc->rp1_freq);
> +		if (unlikely(ret)) {
> +			i915_probe_error(i915, "Failed to toggle efficient freq (%pe)\n",
> +					 ERR_PTR(ret));
> +			return ret;
> +		}
> +
>  		ret = slpc_set_param(slpc,
>  				     SLPC_PARAM_GLOBAL_MIN_GT_UNSLICE_FREQ_MHZ,
>  				     val);
> @@ -587,7 +618,9 @@ static int slpc_set_softlimits(struct intel_guc_slpc *slpc)
>  		return ret;
>  
>  	if (!slpc->min_freq_softlimit) {
> -		slpc->min_freq_softlimit = slpc->min_freq;
> +		ret = intel_guc_slpc_get_min_freq(slpc, &slpc->min_freq_softlimit);
> +		if (unlikely(ret))
> +			return ret;
>  		slpc_to_gt(slpc)->defaults.min_freq = slpc->min_freq_softlimit;
>  	} else if (slpc->min_freq_softlimit != slpc->min_freq) {
>  		return intel_guc_slpc_set_min_freq(slpc,
> @@ -597,29 +630,6 @@ static int slpc_set_softlimits(struct intel_guc_slpc *slpc)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -static int slpc_ignore_eff_freq(struct intel_guc_slpc *slpc, bool ignore)
> -{
> -	int ret = 0;
> -
> -	if (ignore) {
> -		ret = slpc_set_param(slpc,
> -				     SLPC_PARAM_IGNORE_EFFICIENT_FREQUENCY,
> -				     ignore);
> -		if (!ret)
> -			return slpc_set_param(slpc,
> -					      SLPC_PARAM_GLOBAL_MIN_GT_UNSLICE_FREQ_MHZ,
> -					      slpc->min_freq);
> -	} else {
> -		ret = slpc_unset_param(slpc,
> -				       SLPC_PARAM_IGNORE_EFFICIENT_FREQUENCY);
> -		if (!ret)
> -			return slpc_unset_param(slpc,
> -						SLPC_PARAM_GLOBAL_MIN_GT_UNSLICE_FREQ_MHZ);
> -	}
> -
> -	return ret;
> -}
> -
>  static int slpc_use_fused_rp0(struct intel_guc_slpc *slpc)
>  {
>  	/* Force SLPC to used platform rp0 */
> @@ -679,14 +689,6 @@ int intel_guc_slpc_enable(struct intel_guc_slpc *slpc)
>  
>  	slpc_get_rp_values(slpc);
>  
> -	/* Ignore efficient freq and set min to platform min */
> -	ret = slpc_ignore_eff_freq(slpc, true);
> -	if (unlikely(ret)) {
> -		i915_probe_error(i915, "Failed to set SLPC min to RPn (%pe)\n",
> -				 ERR_PTR(ret));
> -		return ret;
> -	}
> -
>  	/* Set SLPC max limit to RP0 */
>  	ret = slpc_use_fused_rp0(slpc);
>  	if (unlikely(ret)) {
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_mchbar_regs.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_mchbar_regs.h
> index 2aad2f0cc8db..ffc702b79579 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_mchbar_regs.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_mchbar_regs.h
> @@ -196,6 +196,9 @@
>  #define   RP1_CAP_MASK				REG_GENMASK(15, 8)
>  #define   RPN_CAP_MASK				REG_GENMASK(23, 16)
>  
> +#define GEN10_FREQ_INFO_REC			_MMIO(MCHBAR_MIRROR_BASE_SNB + 0x5ef0)
> +#define   RPE_MASK				REG_GENMASK(15, 8)
> +
>  /* snb MCH registers for priority tuning */
>  #define MCH_SSKPD				_MMIO(MCHBAR_MIRROR_BASE_SNB + 0x5d10)
>  #define   SSKPD_NEW_WM0_MASK_HSW		REG_GENMASK64(63, 56)
> -- 
> 2.35.1
> 


More information about the Intel-gfx mailing list