Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] drm/mm: add ig_frag selftest

2020-06-03 Thread Nirmoy
On 6/2/20 4:25 PM, Christian König wrote: Am 02.06.20 um 16:13 schrieb Nirmoy: Hi Christian, On 6/2/20 2:47 PM, Christian König wrote: Nirmoy please keep in mind that your current implementation doesn't fully solve the issue the test case is exercising. In other words what you have

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] drm/mm: add ig_frag selftest

2020-06-02 Thread Christian König
Am 02.06.20 um 16:13 schrieb Nirmoy: Hi Christian, On 6/2/20 2:47 PM, Christian König wrote: Nirmoy please keep in mind that your current implementation doesn't fully solve the issue the test case is exercising. In other words what you have implement is fast skipping of fragmented address

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] drm/mm: add ig_frag selftest

2020-06-02 Thread Nirmoy
Hi Christian, On 6/2/20 2:47 PM, Christian König wrote: Nirmoy please keep in mind that your current implementation doesn't fully solve the issue the test case is exercising. In other words what you have implement is fast skipping of fragmented address space for bottom-up and top-down. But

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] drm/mm: add ig_frag selftest

2020-06-02 Thread Christian König
Nirmoy please keep in mind that your current implementation doesn't fully solve the issue the test case is exercising. In other words what you have implement is fast skipping of fragmented address space for bottom-up and top-down. But what this test here exercises is the fast skipping of

[RFC PATCH 1/1] drm/mm: add ig_frag selftest

2020-05-30 Thread Nirmoy Das
This patch introduces fragmentation in the address range and measures time taken by 10k and 20k insertions. ig_frag() will fail if time taken by 20k insertions takes more than 4 times of 10k insertions as we know that insertions scale quadratically. Also tolerate 10% error because of kernel

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] drm/mm: add ig_frag selftest

2020-05-29 Thread Nirmoy
On 5/29/20 5:52 PM, Chris Wilson wrote: Quoting Nirmoy (2020-05-29 16:40:53) This works correctly most of the times but sometimes I have to take my word back. In another machine,  20k insertions in best mode takes 6-9 times more than 10k insertions, all most all the time. evict, bottom-up

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] drm/mm: add ig_frag selftest

2020-05-29 Thread Chris Wilson
Quoting Nirmoy (2020-05-29 16:40:53) > This works correctly most of the times but sometimes > > 20k insertions can take more than 8 times of 10k insertion time. The pressure is on to improve then :) > Regards, > > Nirmoy > > On 5/29/20 6:33 PM, Nirmoy Das wrote: > > This patch introduces

Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] drm/mm: add ig_frag selftest

2020-05-29 Thread Nirmoy
This works correctly most of the times but sometimes 20k insertions can take more than 8 times of 10k insertion time. Regards, Nirmoy On 5/29/20 6:33 PM, Nirmoy Das wrote: This patch introduces fragmentation in the address range and measures time taken by 10k and 20k insertions. ig_frag()