Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-04-06 10:54:57)
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
>
> Include fence context and seqno in low level tracing so it is easier to
> follow flows of individual requests when things go bad.
>
> Also added tracing on the reset side of things.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c | 19 ++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> index f6631ff11caf..a5cd698a2e3c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_lrc.c
> @@ -468,10 +468,11 @@ static void execlists_submit_ports(struct
> intel_engine_cs *engine)
> desc = execlists_update_context(rq);
> GEM_DEBUG_EXEC(port[n].context_id =
> upper_32_bits(desc));
>
> - GEM_TRACE("%s in[%d]: ctx=%d.%d, seqno=%d (current
> %d), prio=%d\n",
> + GEM_TRACE("%s in[%d]: ctx=%d.%d, seqno=%d (fence
> %llx:%d) (current %d), prio=%d\n",
We mix seqno=%d and global_seqno=%d. Please fix my inconsistency. :)
Using seqno is fine as we've standardised on calling the other (fence
x:y).
> engine->name, n,
> port[n].context_id, count,
> rq->global_seqno,
> + rq->fence.context, rq->fence.seqno,
> intel_engine_get_seqno(engine),
> rq_prio(rq));
> } else {
> @@ -742,6 +743,10 @@ execlists_cancel_port_requests(struct
> intel_engine_execlists * const execlists)
> while (num_ports-- && port_isset(port)) {
> struct i915_request *rq = port_request(port);
>
> + GEM_TRACE("%s:port%lu fence %llx:%d (current %d)\n",
> + rq->engine->name, port - execlists->port,
> + rq->fence.context, rq->fence.seqno,
> rq->global_seqno);
Please always keep current == intel_engine_get_seqno(). So _also_ add
seqno=%d.
Hmm, do want to use x=y, or "x: y", or "x y". Again, we might as well
stick to our internal rules for notation. Actually I'd love to adopt a
yaml approach { x: value; y: value }. (But until we have yaml output
throughout, the inconsistency might be annoying ;) Basically I'm
thinking from a scripting aspect, the very least being grep or ^F.
Overall, a very big "yes please" to the improvements.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
