On Wed, 01 Nov 2017 01:11:20 +0100, Anusha Srivatsa
<anusha.sriva...@intel.com> wrote:
Calculate the time that GuC takes to load using
jiffies. This information could be very useful in
^^^^^^^
This is no longer true.
determining if GuC is taking unreasonably long time
to load in a certain platforms.
v2: Calculate time before logs are collected.
Move the guc_load_time variable as a part of
intel_uc_fw struct. Store only final result
which is to be exported to debugfs. (Michal)
Add the load time in the print message as well.
v3: Remove debugfs entry. Remove local variable
guc_finish_load. (Daniel, Tvrtko)
v4: Use ktime_get() instead of jiffies. Use DRM_NOTE
if time taken to load is more than the threshold. On
load times within acceptable range, use DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER
(Tvrtko)
v5: Rebased. Do not expose the load time variable in a global
struct (Tvrtko, Joonas)
Cc: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch>
Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdec...@intel.com>
Cc: Oscar Mateo <oscar.ma...@intel.com>
Cc: Sujaritha Sundaresan <sujaritha.sundare...@intel.com>
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Anusha Srivatsa <anusha.sriva...@intel.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c | 11 +++++++++--
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c
index ef67a36..4ce9a30 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c
@@ -133,7 +133,8 @@ static int guc_ucode_xfer_dma(struct
drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
unsigned long offset;
struct sg_table *sg = vma->pages;
u32 status, rsa[UOS_RSA_SCRATCH_MAX_COUNT];
- int i, ret = 0;
+ int i, ret = 0, load_time;
Note that ktime_ms_delta() return type is s64 not int.
+ ktime_t start_load;
s/start_load/now ?
/* where RSA signature starts */
offset = guc_fw->rsa_offset;
@@ -160,6 +161,7 @@ static int guc_ucode_xfer_dma(struct
drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
I915_WRITE(DMA_ADDR_1_HIGH, DMA_ADDRESS_SPACE_WOPCM);
/* Finally start the DMA */
+ start_load = ktime_get();
Maybe we should either update comment with note about taking start time
or move ktime_get call before that comment to avoid confusion..
I915_WRITE(DMA_CTRL, _MASKED_BIT_ENABLE(UOS_MOVE | START_DMA));
/*
@@ -172,13 +174,18 @@ static int guc_ucode_xfer_dma(struct
drm_i915_private *dev_priv,
*/
ret = wait_for(guc_ucode_response(dev_priv, &status), 100);
+ load_time = ktime_ms_delta(ktime_get(), start_load);
+
DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("DMA status 0x%x, GuC status 0x%x\n",
I915_READ(DMA_CTRL), status);
if ((status & GS_BOOTROM_MASK) == GS_BOOTROM_RSA_FAILED) {
DRM_ERROR("GuC firmware signature verification failed\n");
ret = -ENOEXEC;
- }
+ } else if (load_time > 20)
+ DRM_NOTE("GuC load takes more than acceptable threshold\n");
Please add threshold and actual load time to the message to let user
know that times
+ else
+ DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("GuC loaded in %d ms\n", load_time);
And I'm not sure that we can rely on 'load_time' on timeout in wait_for.
DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("returning %d\n", ret);
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
