On 05/08/2015 11:51 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > Like with every other feature that's not enabled by default we break > runtime pm support way too often by accident because the overall test > coverage isn't great. And it's been almost 2 years since we enabled > the power well code by default > > commit bf51d5e2cda5d36d98e4b46ac7fca9461e512c41 > Author: Paulo Zanoni <paulo.r.zan...@intel.com> > Date: Wed Jul 3 17:12:13 2013 -0300 > > drm/i915: switch disable_power_well default value to 1 > > It's really more than overdue for runtime pm itself to follow! > > Note that in practice this wont do a hole lot yet, since we're still > gated on snd-hda-intel doing proper runtime pm. But I've discussed > this with Liam and we agreed that this needs to be done. And the audio > team is working to hold up their end of this bargain. > > And the justification for updating the autosuspend delay to 100ms: > Quick measurment shows that we can do a full rpm cycle in about 5ms, > which means the delay should still be really conservative from a power > conservation pov. The only workload that would suffer from ping-pong > is also only gpu/compute with all screens off. 100ms should cover any > kind of latency with submitting follow-up batches. > > Cc: Takashi Iwai <ti...@suse.de> > Cc: Liam Girdwood <liam.r.girdw...@intel.com> > Cc: Yang, Libin <libin.y...@intel.com> > Cc: Lin, Mengdong <mengdong....@intel.com> > Cc: Li, Jocelyn <jocelyn...@intel.com> > Cc: Kaskinen, Tanu <tanu.kaski...@intel.com> > Cc: Zanoni, Paulo R <paulo.r.zan...@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > index 317b9b43d1c1..36ecbe275dd9 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_runtime_pm.c > @@ -1919,9 +1919,10 @@ void intel_runtime_pm_enable(struct drm_i915_private > *dev_priv) > return; > } > > - pm_runtime_set_autosuspend_delay(device, 10000); /* 10s */ > + pm_runtime_set_autosuspend_delay(device, 100); > pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(device); > pm_runtime_use_autosuspend(device); > + pm_runtime_allow(device); > > pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(device); > } >
This also changes the timeout... it shouldn't break anything, but it would be good to get some numbers from Eero's team on this. It might be better to use a lower or higher number based on a typical desktop workload by default (though I guess the user or distro can do their own tuning and override the value too). Jesse _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
