On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 11:48 AM Eric Anholt <e...@anholt.net> wrote: > > Rob Clark <robdcl...@gmail.com> writes: > > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 12:26 PM Eric Anholt <e...@anholt.net> wrote: > > > > (tbh I've not really played w/ renderdoc yet.. I should probably do so..) > > > >> - Mozilla folks tell me that firefox's WebRender display lists can be > >> captured in browser and then replayed from the WR repo under > >> apitrace or rendredoc. > >> > >> - I tried capturing Mozilla's new Pathfinder (think SVG renderer), but > >> it wouldn't play the demo under renderdoc. > >> > >> Do you have some apps that should be represented here? > >> > >> - Add microbenchmarks? Looks like it would be pretty easy to grab > >> piglit drawoverhead results, not using renderdoc. Capturing from > >> arbitrary apps expands the scope of the repo in a way I'm not sure I'm > >> excited about (Do we do different configs in those apps? Then we need > >> config infrastructure. Ugh). > >> > >> - I should probably add an estimate of "does this overall improve or > >> hurt perf?" Yay doing more stats. > >> > >> - I'd love to drop scipy. I only need it for stats.t.ppf, but it > >> prevents me from running run.py directly on my targets. > > > > thoughts about adding amd_perfcntr/etc support? I guess some of the > > perfcntrs we have perhaps want some post-processing to turn into > > usuable numbers, and plenty of them we don't know much about what they > > are other than the name. But some of them are easy enough to > > understand (like # of fs ALU cycles, etc), and being able to compare > > that before/after shader optimizations seems useful. > > I'm not coming up with a good usecase for that, myself -- shader-db > gives me a reasonable proxy for ALU cycles, and we've got wall time for > a frame from this new tool, so perf counters would let me > measure... maybe something like cycles spent in shader including stalls > (think an optimization like GCM where shader-db analysis is unsuitable) > but avoiding the rest of the noise introduced from CPU side costs and > scheduling of jobs onto the GPU?
I suspect it would be useful in cases where we shift one bottleneck to another.. anyways, I think it is something that could be done generically (ie. cmdline arg to ask for various counters by name).. that isn't to say that this isn't already pretty useful as-is, but I guess adding perfcntrs is probably something I'd do sooner or later.. BR, -R > Running my current perf analysis overnight feels a lot easier than > trying to add configuration to capture specific GPU perf counters to the > tool. :) > > > Also, it would be nice to have a way to extract "slow frames" somehow > > (maybe out of scope for this tool, but related?).. ie. when framerate > > suddenly drops, those are the frames we probably want to look at more > > closely.. > > Renderdoc lets you capture a series of frames, so I guess you could do > that and pick out your slow one? _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
