[Intel-gfx] [PATCH v5 5/7] drm/i915/gt: Create per-tile RC6 sysfs interface

[Tvrtko Ursulin]

On 18/02/2022 10:46, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> Quoting Andi Shyti (2022-02-17 17:53:58)
>> Hi Tvrtko,
>>
>>>> Now tiles have their own sysfs interfaces under the gt/
>>>> directory. Because RC6 is a property that can be configured on a
>>>> tile basis, then each tile should have its own interface
>>>>
>>>> The new sysfs structure will have a similar layout for the 4 tile
>>>> case:
>>>>
>>>> /sys/.../card0
>>>>            \u251c\u2500\u2500 gt
>>>>            \u2502   \u251c\u2500\u2500 gt0
>>>>            \u2502   \u2502   \u251c\u2500\u2500 id
>>>>            \u2502   \u2502   \u251c\u2500\u2500 rc6_enable
>>>>            \u2502   \u2502   \u251c\u2500\u2500 rc6_residency_ms
>>>>            .   .   .
>>>>            .   .   .
>>>>            .   .
>>>>            \u2502   \u2514\u2500\u2500 gtN
>>>>            \u2502       \u251c\u2500\u2500 id
>>>>            \u2502       \u251c\u2500\u2500 rc6_enable
>>>>            \u2502       \u251c\u2500\u2500 rc6_residency_ms
>>>>            \u2502       .
>>>>            \u2502       .
>>>>            \u2502
>>>>            \u2514\u2500\u2500 power/                -+
>>>>                 \u251c\u2500\u2500 rc6_enable        |    Original interface
>>>>                 \u251c\u2500\u2500 rc6_residency_ms  +->  kept as existing ABI;
>>>>                 .                     |    it multiplexes over
>>>>                 .                     |    the GTs
>>>>                                      -+
>>>>
>>>> The existing interfaces have been kept in their original location
>>>> to preserve the existing ABI. They act on all the GTs: when
>>>> reading they provide the average value from all the GTs.
>>>
>>> Average feels very odd to me. I'd ask if we can get away providing an errno
>>> instead? Or tile zero data?
> 
> Tile zero data is always wrong, in my opinion. If we have round-robin
> scaling workloads like some media cases, part of the system load might
> just disappear when it goes to tile 1.

I was thinking that in conjunction with deprecated log message it 
wouldn't be wrong - I mean if the route take was to eventually retire 
the legacy files altogether.

>> Real multiplexing would be providing something when reading and
>> when writing. The idea of average came while revieweing with
>> Chris the write multiplexing. Indeed it makes sense to provide
>> some common value, but I don't know how useful it can be to the
>> user (still if the user needs any average).
> 
> I think all read/write controls like min/max/boost_freq should return
> an error from the global interface if all the tiles don't return same
> value. Write will always overwrite per-tile values.

That would work I think, if the option chosen was not to retire the 
legacy files.

> When we have frequency readbacks without control, returning MAX() across
> tiles would be the logical thing. The fact that parts of the hardware can
> be clocked lower when one part is fully utilized is the "new feature".
> 
> After that we're only really left with the rc6_residency_ms. And that is
> the tough one. I'm inclined that MIN() across tiles would be the right
> answer. If you are fully utilizing a single tile, you should be able to
> see it.
  So we have MIN, AVG or SUM, or errno, or remove the file (which is 
just a different kind of errno?) to choose from. :)

Regards,

Tvrtko

> This all would be what feels natural for an user who has their setup
> tuned for single-tile device. And would allow simple round-robing
> balancing across the tiles in somewhat coherent manner.