Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Extend i915_powersave parameter.

2013-07-18 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 11:23 PM, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: My opinion is that we respect the specific module parameters, and if they are left to default values, then apply the global powersave parameter. If that too is default, the

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Extend i915_powersave parameter.

2013-07-17 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 11:23 PM, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: >>> My opinion is that we respect the specific module parameters, and if >>> they are left to default values, then apply the global powersave >>> parameter. If that too is default, then we apply the module default. >> >> Jumping in a bit late,

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Extend i915_powersave parameter.

2013-07-17 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:13 PM, Chris Wilson > wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 02:45:29PM -0300, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: >>> So if I understood correctly you suggest that if we have >>> i915_powersave=0 and i915_enable_rc6=1 we should enabl

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Extend i915_powersave parameter.

2013-07-17 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:13 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 02:45:29PM -0300, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: >> So if I understood correctly you suggest that if we have >> i915_powersave=0 and i915_enable_rc6=1 we should enable rc6? >> This is not how it is implemented nowadays on fbc rig

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Extend i915_powersave parameter.

2013-07-17 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 02:45:29PM -0300, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > So if I understood correctly you suggest that if we have > i915_powersave=0 and i915_enable_rc6=1 we should enable rc6? > This is not how it is implemented nowadays on fbc right now... And > this lead me to use pwoesave as an umbrella

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Extend i915_powersave parameter.

2013-07-17 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:36:12PM -0300, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: >> i915_powersave was already an umbrella for disabling downclocking and fbc. >> Now on it is extended to also force enabling them. >> Also more powersavings features has been adde

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Extend i915_powersave parameter.

2013-07-17 Thread Chris Wilson
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:36:12PM -0300, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > i915_powersave was already an umbrella for disabling downclocking and fbc. > Now on it is extended to also force enabling them. > Also more powersavings features has been added under it: RC6 and IPS. > > In the future it can cover mor

Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Extend i915_powersave parameter.

2013-07-17 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
when playing with fbc and psr I noticed that this flag was underused so I decided to extend it a bit... I know that the force enable made it more difficult to implement along with individual parameters, but I sent this patch as a startup for the discussion... please let me know if you have better

[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Extend i915_powersave parameter.

2013-07-17 Thread Rodrigo Vivi
i915_powersave was already an umbrella for disabling downclocking and fbc. Now on it is extended to also force enabling them. Also more powersavings features has been added under it: RC6 and IPS. In the future it can cover more powersavings features like PSR, Slice Shutdown, etc. So this will be t