This series bring the anomaly back,

that 'ondemand' is _faster_ than 'performance':

cpupower frequency-set -g ondemand

/home/dieter> smoketest
5905 presents in 5.00014 seconds (FPS: 1180.97)
6101 presents in 5.00115 seconds (FPS: 1219.92)
6020 presents in 5.00038 seconds (FPS: 1203.91)
6021 presents in 5.0002 seconds (FPS: 1204.15)
6005 presents in 5.00013 seconds (FPS: 1200.97)
6023 presents in 5.00005 seconds (FPS: 1204.59)
frames:41278, elapsedms:34411

cpupower frequency-set -g performance

/home/dieter> smoketest
5326 presents in 5.00078 seconds (FPS: 1065.03)
5532 presents in 5.00023 seconds (FPS: 1106.35)
5487 presents in 5.0009 seconds (FPS: 1097.2)
5516 presents in 5.00014 seconds (FPS: 1103.17)
5516 presents in 5.00082 seconds (FPS: 1103.02)
frames:31385, elapsedms:28709

I saw this with and without Dave's TLS patch set.

Apart from that:

Tested-by: Dieter Nützel <die...@nuetzel-hh.de>

Dieter

Am 03.07.2018 12:43, schrieb Samuel Pitoiset:
That might reduce CPU overhead a little bit when using
RADV_TRACE_FILE.

Signed-off-by: Samuel Pitoiset <samuel.pitoi...@gmail.com>
---
 src/amd/vulkan/radv_cmd_buffer.c | 11 +++++++----
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/amd/vulkan/radv_cmd_buffer.c b/src/amd/vulkan/radv_cmd_buffer.c
index 26d9fef314..0a7a3f3fa9 100644
--- a/src/amd/vulkan/radv_cmd_buffer.c
+++ b/src/amd/vulkan/radv_cmd_buffer.c
@@ -446,7 +446,6 @@ void radv_cmd_buffer_trace_emit(struct
radv_cmd_buffer *cmd_buffer)
        MAYBE_UNUSED unsigned cdw_max =
radeon_check_space(cmd_buffer->device->ws, cmd_buffer->cs, 7);

        ++cmd_buffer->state.trace_id;
-       radv_cs_add_buffer(device->ws, cs, device->trace_bo, 8);
        radv_emit_write_data_packet(cs, va, 1, &cmd_buffer->state.trace_id);
        radeon_emit(cs, PKT3(PKT3_NOP, 0, 0));
        radeon_emit(cs, AC_ENCODE_TRACE_POINT(cmd_buffer->state.trace_id));
@@ -509,7 +508,6 @@ radv_save_pipeline(struct radv_cmd_buffer *cmd_buffer,
        data[0] = (uintptr_t)pipeline;
        data[1] = (uintptr_t)pipeline >> 32;

-       radv_cs_add_buffer(device->ws, cs, device->trace_bo, 8);
        radv_emit_write_data_packet(cs, va, 2, data);
 }

@@ -551,7 +549,6 @@ radv_save_descriptors(struct radv_cmd_buffer *cmd_buffer,
                data[i * 2 + 1] = (uintptr_t)set >> 32;
        }

-       radv_cs_add_buffer(device->ws, cs, device->trace_bo, 8);
        radv_emit_write_data_packet(cs, va, MAX_SETS * 2, data);
 }

@@ -2300,8 +2297,14 @@ VkResult radv_BeginCommandBuffer(
                radv_cmd_buffer_set_subpass(cmd_buffer, subpass, false);
        }

-       if (unlikely(cmd_buffer->device->trace_bo))
+       if (unlikely(cmd_buffer->device->trace_bo)) {
+               struct radv_device *device = cmd_buffer->device;
+
+               radv_cs_add_buffer(device->ws, cmd_buffer->cs,
+                                  device->trace_bo, 8);
+
                radv_cmd_buffer_trace_emit(cmd_buffer);
+       }

        cmd_buffer->status = RADV_CMD_BUFFER_STATUS_RECORDING;
_______________________________________________
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

Reply via email to