Re: [LKP] [drm/mgag200] 90f479ae51: vm-scalability.median -18.8% regression

2019-08-01 Thread Feng Tang
On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 02:19:53PM +0800, Rong Chen wrote: > > > >commit: 90f479ae51afa45efab97afdde9b94b9660dd3e4 ("drm/mgag200: > >Replace struct mga_fbdev with generic framebuffer emulation") > >https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-

Re: [LKP] [drm/mgag200] 90f479ae51: vm-scalability.median -18.8% regression

2019-08-01 Thread Feng Tang
Hi Thomas, On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 11:59:28AM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > Hi > > Am 01.08.19 um 10:37 schrieb Feng Tang: > > On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 02:19:53PM +0800, Rong Chen wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>

Re: [PATCH 01/12] slab: Introduce kmalloc_size_roundup()

2022-09-22 Thread Feng Tang
mation. > > > > We can serve the needs of users of ksize() and still have accurate buffer > > length hinting for the compiler by doing the bucket size calculation > > _before_ the allocation. Code can instead ask "how large an allocation > > would I get for a given s

Re: [LKP] [drm/mgag200] 90f479ae51: vm-scalability.median -18.8% regression

2019-09-16 Thread Feng Tang
Hi Thomas, On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 04:12:37PM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > Hi > > Am 04.09.19 um 08:27 schrieb Feng Tang: > > Hi Thomas, > > > > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:51:40PM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > >> Hi > >> > >> A

Re: [LKP] [drm/mgag200] 90f479ae51: vm-scalability.median -18.8% regression

2019-08-23 Thread Feng Tang
Hi Thomas, On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 07:25:11PM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > Hi > > I was traveling and could reply earlier. Sorry for taking so long. No problem! I guessed so :) > > Am 13.08.19 um 11:36 schrieb Feng Tang: > > Hi Thomas, > > > > On Mon,

Re: [LKP] [drm/mgag200] 90f479ae51: vm-scalability.median -18.8% regression

2019-09-03 Thread Feng Tang
Hi Thomas, On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 12:51:40PM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > Hi > > Am 28.08.19 um 11:37 schrieb Rong Chen: > > Hi Thomas, > > > > On 8/28/19 1:16 AM, Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > >> Hi > >> > >> Am 27.08.19 um 14:33 schrieb Chen, Rong A: > >>> Both patches have little impact on

Re: [LKP] [drm/mgag200] 90f479ae51: vm-scalability.median -18.8% regression

2019-09-04 Thread Feng Tang
Hi Daniel, On Wed, Sep 04, 2019 at 10:11:11AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 8:53 AM Thomas Zimmermann wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > Am 04.09.19 um 08:27 schrieb Feng Tang: > > >> Thank you for testing. But don't get too excited, b

Re: [LKP] [drm/mgag200] 90f479ae51: vm-scalability.median -18.8% regression

2019-09-04 Thread Feng Tang
Hi Vetter, On Wed, Sep 04, 2019 at 01:20:29PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 1:15 PM Dave Airlie wrote: > > > > On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 19:17, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 10:35 AM Feng Tang wrote: > > > &

Re: [LKP] [drm/mgag200] 90f479ae51: vm-scalability.median -18.8% regression

2019-09-05 Thread Feng Tang
On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 06:37:47PM +0800, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 8:58 AM Feng Tang wrote: > > > > Hi Vetter, > > > > On Wed, Sep 04, 2019 at 01:20:29PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 1:15 PM Dave Airlie wrote: &

Re: [drm/mgag200] 90f479ae51: vm-scalability.median -18.8% regression

2019-08-05 Thread Feng Tang
er console 90f479ae51a drm/mgag200: Replace struct mga_fbdev with generic framebuffer emulation 01e75fea0d5 mgag200: restore the depth back to 24 f1f8555dfb9a70a2 90f479ae51afa45efab97afdde9 01e75fea0d5ff39d3e588c20ec5 --- --- 43921 ± 2% -18.3% 35884 -4.8

Re: [drm/mgag200] 90f479ae51: vm-scalability.median -18.8% regression

2019-08-05 Thread Feng Tang
- --- > > 43921 ± 2% -18.3% 35884-4.8% 41826 > > vm-scalability.median > > 14889337 -17.5% 12291029 -4.1% 14278574 > > vm-scalability.throughput > > > > commit 01e75fe

Re: [LKP] [drm/mgag200] 90f479ae51: vm-scalability.median -18.8% regression

2019-08-12 Thread Feng Tang
Hi Thomas, On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 04:12:29PM +0800, Rong Chen wrote: > Hi, > > >>Actually we run the benchmark as a background process, do we need to > >>disable the cursor and test again? > >There's a worker thread that updates the display from the shadow buffer. > >The blinking cursor periodic

Re: [LKP] [drm/mgag200] 90f479ae51: vm-scalability.median -18.8% regression

2019-08-13 Thread Feng Tang
Hi Thomas, On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 03:25:45PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 04:12:29PM +0800, Rong Chen wrote: > > Hi, > > > > >>Actually we run the benchmark as a background process, do we need to > > >>disa

Re: [LKP] [drm/mgag200] 90f479ae51: vm-scalability.median -18.8% regression

2019-08-15 Thread Feng Tang
Hi Thomas, On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 05:36:16PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 03:25:45PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > > > On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 04:12:29PM +0800, Rong Chen wrote: > > > Hi, > > >

[PATCH] drm/dp: add module parameter for the dpcd access max retries

2018-05-07 Thread Feng Tang
= 32: [0.465818] calling i915_init+0x0/0x51 @ 1 [0.925831] initcall i915_init+0x0/0x51 returned 0 after 449219 usecs Signed-off-by: Feng Tang --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_dp_helper.c | 22 +++--- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a

Re: [PATCH] drm/dp: add module parameter for the dpcd access max retries

2018-05-07 Thread Feng Tang
Hi Chris, Thanks for the prompt review! On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:40:45AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Feng Tang (2018-05-07 11:36:09) > > To fulfil the Dell 4K monitor, the dpcd max retries has been bumped > > from 7 to 32, which may hurt the boot/init time for some pl

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/dp: add module parameter for the dpcd access max retries

2018-05-07 Thread Feng Tang
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 05:09:21PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 02:33:25PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Feng Tang (2018-05-07 22:26:34) > > > Hi Chris, > > > > > > Thanks for the prompt review! > > > > > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/dp: add module parameter for the dpcd access max retries

2018-05-08 Thread Feng Tang
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 05:09:21PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 02:33:25PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Feng Tang (2018-05-07 22:26:34) > > > Hi Chris, > > > > > > Thanks for the prompt review! > > > > > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/dp: add module parameter for the dpcd access max retries

2018-05-08 Thread Feng Tang
>> > > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:40:45AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > >> > > > > Quoting Feng Tang (2018-05-07 11:36:09) > >> > > > > > To fulfil the Dell 4K monitor, the dpcd max retries has been > >> > > > >

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/dp: add module parameter for the dpcd access max retries

2018-05-08 Thread Feng Tang
On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 10:30:19PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Wed, 09 May 2018, Feng Tang wrote: > > >> > > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:40:45AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > >> >> > > > > Quoting Feng Tang (2018-05-07 11:36:09) > >&

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/dp: add module parameter for the dpcd access max retries

2018-05-09 Thread Feng Tang
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:53:53AM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Wed, 09 May 2018, Feng Tang wrote: > > On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 10:30:19PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > >> On Wed, 09 May 2018, Feng Tang wrote: > >> >> Well if it's edp probing, then atm we do

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/dp: add module parameter for the dpcd access max retries

2018-05-10 Thread Feng Tang
On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 12:28:15PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > On Wed, 09 May 2018, Feng Tang wrote: > > On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 10:53:53AM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > >> On Wed, 09 May 2018, Feng Tang wrote: > >> > On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 10:30:19PM +0300, Jani Ni