search for: get_counter_index

.../nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c > index d95eb86..ddb36e7 100644 > --- a/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c > +++ b/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c > @@ -140,6 +140,24 @@ nvkm_pmu_recv(struct work_struct *work) > process, message, data0, data1); > } > > +#define get_counter_index(v, i) (((v) & 0xff << ((i)*8)) >> ((i)*8)) Is this the same thing as (v >> (i*8)) & 0xff ? I can't tell if you're attempting to preserve the sign, but don't see why you'd want to since it all just becomes a u8 anyways. > + > +int > +nvkm_pmu_ge...

...a/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c b/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c index d95eb86..ddb36e7 100644 --- a/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c +++ b/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c @@ -140,6 +140,24 @@ nvkm_pmu_recv(struct work_struct *work) process, message, data0, data1); } +#define get_counter_index(v, i) (((v) & 0xff << ((i)*8)) >> ((i)*8)) + +int +nvkm_pmu_get_perf_data(struct nvkm_pmu *pmu, struct nvkm_pmu_load_data *data) +{ + int result[2], ret; + ret = nvkm_pmu_send(pmu, result, PROC_PERF, PERF_MSG_LOAD, 0, 0); + + if (ret < 0) + return ret; + + data->core = get_co...

...a/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c b/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c index d95eb86..9f4ce6a 100644 --- a/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c +++ b/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c @@ -140,6 +140,24 @@ nvkm_pmu_recv(struct work_struct *work) process, message, data0, data1); } +#define get_counter_index(v, i) (((v) >> ((i)*8)) & 0xff) + +int +nvkm_pmu_get_perf_data(struct nvkm_pmu *pmu, struct nvkm_pmu_load_data *data) +{ + u32 result[2], ret; + ret = nvkm_pmu_send(pmu, result, PROC_PERF, PERF_MSG_LOAD, 0, 0); + + if (ret < 0) + return ret; + + data->core = get_counter_index(resul...

...a/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c b/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c index d95eb86..6594812 100644 --- a/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c +++ b/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/base.c @@ -140,6 +140,24 @@ nvkm_pmu_recv(struct work_struct *work) process, message, data0, data1); } +#define get_counter_index(v, i) (((v) >> ((i)*8)) & 0xff) + +int +nvkm_pmu_get_perf_data(struct nvkm_pmu *pmu, struct nvkm_pmu_load_data *data) +{ + u32 result[2]; + + int ret = nvkm_pmu_send(pmu, result, PROC_PERF, PERF_MSG_LOAD, 0, 0); + if (ret < 0) + return ret; + + data->core = get_counter_index(result...

this series makes use of the load counters we can use to get information about the current load of the gpu. This series includes the needed pmu bits and a debugfs interface to read them out. Currently the values are between 0 and 255, because it is much easier to implement it this way on the pmu. Karol Herbst (4): subdev/pmu/fuc: add gk104 pmu/fuc: add macros for pdaemon pwr counters

these are usually used for dynamic reclocking on gt215 and newer The counters are used to get the load of the core, memory, video and pcie loads currently I expose the loads through a debugfs "current_load" file, but I want to move that to nvif and just add a wrapper around that in debugfs for convenience Anyway there are still some issues I would like to discuss: 1. currently the

these are usually used for dynamic reclocking on gt215 and newer The counters are used to get the load of the core, memory, video and pcie loads currently I expose the loads through a debugfs "current_load" file, but I want to move that to nvif and just add a wrapper around that in debugfs for convenience. Using nvif would have the advantage, that userspace tools can easily get loads