[Mesa-dev] [PATCH 5/8] radeonsi: don't expose performance counters for non-existent blocks

[Marek Olšák]

From: Marek Olšák <marek.olsak at amd.com>

---
 src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_perfcounter.c | 29 ++++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_perfcounter.c b/src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_perfcounter.c
index ad62e55f227..346d4c50044 100644
--- a/src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_perfcounter.c
+++ b/src/gallium/drivers/radeonsi/si_perfcounter.c
@@ -338,87 +338,87 @@ static struct si_pc_block_base cik_SRBM = {
 
 /* Both the number of instances and selectors varies between chips of the same
  * class. We only differentiate by class here and simply expose the maximum
  * number over all chips in a class.
  *
  * Unfortunately, GPUPerfStudio uses the order of performance counter groups
  * blindly once it believes it has identified the hardware, so the order of
  * blocks here matters.
  */
 static struct si_pc_block groups_CIK[] = {
-	{ &cik_CB, 226, 4 },
+	{ &cik_CB, 226},
 	{ &cik_CPF, 17 },
-	{ &cik_DB, 257, 4 },
+	{ &cik_DB, 257},
 	{ &cik_GRBM, 34 },
 	{ &cik_GRBMSE, 15 },
 	{ &cik_PA_SU, 153 },
 	{ &cik_PA_SC, 395 },
 	{ &cik_SPI, 186 },
 	{ &cik_SQ, 252 },
 	{ &cik_SX, 32 },
 	{ &cik_TA, 111, 11 },
 	{ &cik_TCA, 39, 2 },
-	{ &cik_TCC, 160, 16 },
+	{ &cik_TCC, 160},
 	{ &cik_TD, 55, 11 },
 	{ &cik_TCP, 154, 11 },
 	{ &cik_GDS, 121 },
 	{ &cik_VGT, 140 },
 	{ &cik_IA, 22 },
 	{ &cik_MC, 22 },
 	{ &cik_SRBM, 19 },
 	{ &cik_WD, 22 },
 	{ &cik_CPG, 46 },
 	{ &cik_CPC, 22 },
 
 };
 
 static struct si_pc_block groups_VI[] = {
-	{ &cik_CB, 405, 4 },
+	{ &cik_CB, 405},
 	{ &cik_CPF, 19 },
-	{ &cik_DB, 257, 4 },
+	{ &cik_DB, 257},
 	{ &cik_GRBM, 34 },
 	{ &cik_GRBMSE, 15 },
 	{ &cik_PA_SU, 153 },
 	{ &cik_PA_SC, 397 },
 	{ &cik_SPI, 197 },
 	{ &cik_SQ, 273 },
 	{ &cik_SX, 34 },
 	{ &cik_TA, 119, 16 },
 	{ &cik_TCA, 35, 2 },
-	{ &cik_TCC, 192, 16 },
+	{ &cik_TCC, 192},
 	{ &cik_TD, 55, 16 },
 	{ &cik_TCP, 180, 16 },
 	{ &cik_GDS, 121 },
 	{ &cik_VGT, 147 },
 	{ &cik_IA, 24 },
 	{ &cik_MC, 22 },
 	{ &cik_SRBM, 27 },
 	{ &cik_WD, 37 },
 	{ &cik_CPG, 48 },
 	{ &cik_CPC, 24 },
 
 };
 
 static struct si_pc_block groups_gfx9[] = {
-	{ &cik_CB, 438, 4 },
+	{ &cik_CB, 438},
 	{ &cik_CPF, 32 },
-	{ &cik_DB, 328, 4 },
+	{ &cik_DB, 328},
 	{ &cik_GRBM, 38 },
 	{ &cik_GRBMSE, 16 },
 	{ &cik_PA_SU, 292 },
 	{ &cik_PA_SC, 491 },
 	{ &cik_SPI, 196 },
 	{ &cik_SQ, 374 },
 	{ &cik_SX, 208 },
 	{ &cik_TA, 119, 16 },
 	{ &cik_TCA, 35, 2 },
-	{ &cik_TCC, 256, 16 },
+	{ &cik_TCC, 256},
 	{ &cik_TD, 57, 16 },
 	{ &cik_TCP, 85, 16 },
 	{ &cik_GDS, 121 },
 	{ &cik_VGT, 148 },
 	{ &cik_IA, 32 },
 	{ &cik_WD, 58 },
 	{ &cik_CPG, 59 },
 	{ &cik_CPC, 35 },
 };
 
@@ -697,24 +697,27 @@ void si_init_perfcounters(struct si_screen *screen)
 	pc->emit_read = si_pc_emit_read;
 	pc->cleanup = si_pc_cleanup;
 
 	if (!si_perfcounters_init(pc, num_blocks))
 		goto error;
 
 	for (i = 0; i < num_blocks; ++i) {
 		struct si_pc_block *block = &blocks[i];
 		unsigned instances = block->instances;
 
-		if (!strcmp(block->b->name, "IA")) {
-			if (screen->info.max_se > 2)
-				instances = 2;
-		}
+		if (!strcmp(block->b->name, "CB") ||
+		    !strcmp(block->b->name, "DB"))
+			instances = screen->info.max_se;
+		else if (!strcmp(block->b->name, "TCC"))
+			instances = screen->info.num_tcc_blocks;
+		else if (!strcmp(block->b->name, "IA"))
+			instances = MAX2(1, screen->info.max_se / 2);
 
 		si_perfcounters_add_block(screen, pc,
 					    block->b->name,
 					    block->b->flags,
 					    block->b->num_counters,
 					    block->selectors,
 					    instances,
 					    block);
 	}
 
-- 
2.17.1