On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 07:44:17PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 9/1/2012 6:36 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
>
> > It depends on what you're trying to measure. I think this patch is quite
> > useful but I think I'll make you defend your patch now since you're the
> > maintainer and you took
> >
On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 06:36:32PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On 2012-09-01 12:14, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Ben Widawsky
> >wrote:
> >>On 2012-09-01 11:28, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >>>
> >>>On 9/1/2012 11:26 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
>
> On 2012-08-30 04:26
On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 07:44:17PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 9/1/2012 6:36 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
>
> > It depends on what you're trying to measure. I think this patch is quite
> > useful but I think I'll make you defend your patch now since you're the
> > maintainer and you took
> >
On Sat, Sep 01, 2012 at 06:36:32PM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On 2012-09-01 12:14, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> >On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Ben Widawsky
> >wrote:
> >>On 2012-09-01 11:28, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >>>
> >>>On 9/1/2012 11:26 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
>
> On 2012-08-30 04:26
On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 18:16:52 -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On 2012-09-01 12:22, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 11:35:13 -0700, Ben Widawsky
> > wrote:
> >> I have no problem with Daniel's patch. It's just a matter of cutting
> >> through some scheduler BS of "when the GPU wants to ch
On 9/1/2012 8:05 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> , from a single trace event you should know the current frequency and the
> previous frequency.
but if you're doing a heavy game or whatever... you may stay at the highest all
the time,
and I get no information...
same for getting stuck or being always l
On 9/1/2012 6:36 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> It depends on what you're trying to measure. I think this patch is quite
> useful but I think I'll make you defend your patch now since you're the
> maintainer and you took
> your own patch and you're shooting down my idea. So please tell me what
> Pow
On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 18:16:52 -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On 2012-09-01 12:22, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 11:35:13 -0700, Ben Widawsky
> > wrote:
> >> I have no problem with Daniel's patch. It's just a matter of cutting
> >> through some scheduler BS of "when the GPU wants to ch
On 2012-09-01 20:06, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On 9/1/2012 8:05 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
, from a single trace event you should know the current frequency
and the previous frequency.
but if you're doing a heavy game or whatever... you may stay at the
highest all the time,
and I get no information.
On 2012-09-01 19:44, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On 9/1/2012 6:36 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
It depends on what you're trying to measure. I think this patch is
quite useful but I think I'll make you defend your patch now since
you're the maintainer and you took
your own patch and you're shooting down
On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On 2012-09-01 11:28, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>
>> On 9/1/2012 11:26 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2012-08-30 04:26, Daniel Vetter wrote:
We've had and still have too many issues where the gpu turbot doesn't
quite to what it
On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 11:35:13 -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> I have no problem with Daniel's patch. It's just a matter of cutting
> through some scheduler BS of "when the GPU wants to change frequency"
> vs. "when we actually change the GPU frequency." I think *both* are
> interesting.
We already
On 2012-09-01 20:06, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 9/1/2012 8:05 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
>> , from a single trace event you should know the current frequency
>> and the previous frequency.
> but if you're doing a heavy game or whatever... you may stay at the
> highest all the time,
> and I get no i
On 9/1/2012 8:05 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> , from a single trace event you should know the current frequency and the
> previous frequency.
but if you're doing a heavy game or whatever... you may stay at the highest all
the time,
and I get no information...
same for getting stuck or being always l
On 2012-09-01 19:44, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 9/1/2012 6:36 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
>
>> It depends on what you're trying to measure. I think this patch is
>> quite useful but I think I'll make you defend your patch now since
>> you're the maintainer and you took
>> your own patch and you're
On 9/1/2012 6:36 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> It depends on what you're trying to measure. I think this patch is quite
> useful but I think I'll make you defend your patch now since you're the
> maintainer and you took
> your own patch and you're shooting down my idea. So please tell me what
> Pow
On 2012-09-01 12:14, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Ben Widawsky
wrote:
On 2012-09-01 11:28, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On 9/1/2012 11:26 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
On 2012-08-30 04:26, Daniel Vetter wrote:
We've had and still have too many issues where the gpu turbot
doe
On 2012-09-01 12:14, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Ben Widawsky
> wrote:
>> On 2012-09-01 11:28, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>>
>>> On 9/1/2012 11:26 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
On 2012-08-30 04:26, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>
> We've had and still have too many iss
On 2012-09-01 12:22, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 11:35:13 -0700, Ben Widawsky
wrote:
I have no problem with Daniel's patch. It's just a matter of cutting
through some scheduler BS of "when the GPU wants to change
frequency"
vs. "when we actually change the GPU frequency." I think
On 2012-09-01 12:22, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 11:35:13 -0700, Ben Widawsky
> wrote:
>> I have no problem with Daniel's patch. It's just a matter of cutting
>> through some scheduler BS of "when the GPU wants to change
>> frequency"
>> vs. "when we actually change the GPU frequen
On 9/1/2012 11:26 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On 2012-08-30 04:26, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> We've had and still have too many issues where the gpu turbot doesn't
>> quite to what it's supposed to do (or what we want it to do).
>>
>> Adding a tracepoint to track when the desired gpu frequence changes
>
On Sat, 01 Sep 2012 11:35:13 -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> I have no problem with Daniel's patch. It's just a matter of cutting
> through some scheduler BS of "when the GPU wants to change frequency"
> vs. "when we actually change the GPU frequency." I think *both* are
> interesting.
We already
On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On 2012-09-01 11:28, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>>
>> On 9/1/2012 11:26 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2012-08-30 04:26, Daniel Vetter wrote:
We've had and still have too many issues where the gpu turbot doesn't
quite to what it
On 2012-09-01 11:28, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
On 9/1/2012 11:26 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
On 2012-08-30 04:26, Daniel Vetter wrote:
We've had and still have too many issues where the gpu turbot
doesn't
quite to what it's supposed to do (or what we want it to do).
Adding a tracepoint to track whe
On 2012-09-01 11:28, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 9/1/2012 11:26 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
>> On 2012-08-30 04:26, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>>> We've had and still have too many issues where the gpu turbot
>>> doesn't
>>> quite to what it's supposed to do (or what we want it to do).
>>>
>>> Adding a tra
On 9/1/2012 11:26 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
> On 2012-08-30 04:26, Daniel Vetter wrote:
>> We've had and still have too many issues where the gpu turbot doesn't
>> quite to what it's supposed to do (or what we want it to do).
>>
>> Adding a tracepoint to track when the desired gpu frequence changes
>
On 2012-08-30 04:26, Daniel Vetter wrote:
We've had and still have too many issues where the gpu turbot doesn't
quite to what it's supposed to do (or what we want it to do).
Adding a tracepoint to track when the desired gpu frequence changes
should help a lot in characterizing and understanding
On 2012-08-30 04:26, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> We've had and still have too many issues where the gpu turbot doesn't
> quite to what it's supposed to do (or what we want it to do).
>
> Adding a tracepoint to track when the desired gpu frequence changes
> should help a lot in characterizing and underst
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 02:34:11PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 13:26:48 +0200, Daniel Vetter
> wrote:
> > We've had and still have too many issues where the gpu turbot doesn't
> > quite to what it's supposed to do (or what we want it to do).
> >
> > Adding a tracepoint to tr
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 02:34:11PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 13:26:48 +0200, Daniel Vetter
> wrote:
> > We've had and still have too many issues where the gpu turbot doesn't
> > quite to what it's supposed to do (or what we want it to do).
> >
> > Adding a tracepoint to tr
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 13:26:48 +0200, Daniel Vetter
wrote:
> We've had and still have too many issues where the gpu turbot doesn't
> quite to what it's supposed to do (or what we want it to do).
>
> Adding a tracepoint to track when the desired gpu frequence changes
> should help a lot in characte
On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 13:26:48 +0200, Daniel Vetter
wrote:
> We've had and still have too many issues where the gpu turbot doesn't
> quite to what it's supposed to do (or what we want it to do).
>
> Adding a tracepoint to track when the desired gpu frequence changes
> should help a lot in characte
32 matches
Mail list logo
