[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

Michel Dänzer  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE

--- Comment #21 from Michel Dänzer  ---
Let's assume this is the same as bug 110781, which is now fixed.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 110781 ***

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #20 from Clemens Eisserer  ---
Hi Richard,

Unfortunatly there was very little interest in tackling the issue itself,
despite bisecting it was real pain.

For me the problem was "fixed" by switching to amdgpu, a luxury the r300/r600
code paths don't have - so I guess the report is still valid. Thanks for
re-opening it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #19 from Richard Thier  ---
Possibly related problem on r300 code paths:

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110781
https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/linux-graphics-x-org-drivers/open-source-amd-linux/1099745-how-to-tell-if-a-driver-is-gallium-or-just-mesa-slow-renderng-with-radeon/page10
https://bbs.archlinux32.org/viewtopic.php?pid=5973#p5973

It took me a whole lot of time to analyse the source of the problem and this is
the commit that causes slowdown for me too.

For me it was really useful to do an strace before and after this commit and I
find the GEM_CREATE numbers rise from around 7-11 to about thousands when just
doing 10 seconds of glxgears which is clearly wrong and causes my slowdown.

Maybe would be useful to test if the problem is also related to GEM/TTL in this
case? Just informing you because I have found this earlier issue when googling
the commit hash...

prenex

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #18 from Dieter Nützel  ---
(In reply to Dieter Nützel from comment #17)
> (In reply to Clemens Eisserer from comment #16)
> > some here, on my Kaveri 7650k results with the patch are basically unchanged
> > :
> > 
> > amdgpu:
> > 8557.942992 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32
> > 
> > should I test with radeon too?
> > 
> > Dieter: Just to be curious, which values do you obtain with your polaris 
> > GPU?
> 
> RX580 (DC enabled) 'cpupower frequency-set -g performance'
> 
> composit (faster): !!! ;-)
> ./JXRenderMark-1.0.1 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32
> 29845.626072 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
> 
> 30745.957643 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
> 
> 30922.973502 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
> 
> 30460.302141 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
> 
> 30330.232018 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
> 
> 30757.257217 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32
> 
> without (slower):
> 28507.546115 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
> 
> 29570.588821 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
> 
> 29909.051450 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
> 
> 29839.934108 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
> 
> 30024.853684 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
> 
> 29852.673826 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32

This was with Marek's patch from Comment 14.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #17 from Dieter Nützel  ---
(In reply to Clemens Eisserer from comment #16)
> some here, on my Kaveri 7650k results with the patch are basically unchanged
> :
> 
> amdgpu:
> 8557.942992 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32
> 
> should I test with radeon too?
> 
> Dieter: Just to be curious, which values do you obtain with your polaris GPU?

RX580 (DC enabled) 'cpupower frequency-set -g performance'

composit (faster): !!! ;-)
./JXRenderMark-1.0.1 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32
29845.626072 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
30745.957643 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
30922.973502 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
30460.302141 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
30330.232018 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
30757.257217 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32

without (slower):
28507.546115 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
29570.588821 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
29909.051450 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
29839.934108 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
30024.853684 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32  
29852.673826 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #16 from Clemens Eisserer  ---
some here, on my Kaveri 7650k results with the patch are basically unchanged :

amdgpu:
8557.942992 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32

should I test with radeon too?

Dieter: Just to be curious, which values do you obtain with your polaris GPU?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #15 from Dieter Nützel  ---
I can't hardly see any changes.(In reply to Marek Olšák from comment #14)
> Can you test this patch?
> https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/210920/

I see hardly any changes with radeonsi on RX 580.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #14 from Marek Olšák  ---
Can you test this patch?
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/210920/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

Clemens Eisserer  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|WORKSFORME  |---
 Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED

--- Comment #13 from Clemens Eisserer  ---
For my kaveri-system I got the following numbers (composition manager disabled,
Xephyr):

./JXRenderMark-1.0.1 3 32 3 32 3 32

#amdgpu, IOMMU enabled
12325.077581 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32# mesa-17.2.4 self-compiled
10582.511406 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32# mesa-17.3.6, fedora 27,
updates repo
8636.834555 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32 # mesa-18.1.0-devel
self-compiled

#radeon, IOMMU enabled
12060.500868 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32# mesa-17.2.4, self-compiled
6330.459659 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32 # mesa-17.3.6, fedora 27,
updates repo
6100.570157 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32 # mesa-18.1.0-devel
self-compiled


So amdgpu didn't regress as badly as radeon, but performance is constantly
decreasing.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

Marek Olšák  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |WORKSFORME
 Status|NEW |RESOLVED

--- Comment #12 from Marek Olšák  ---
(In reply to Clemens Eisserer from comment #10)
> I bisected the regression again, this time with the benchmark mentioned in
> the post above (JXRenderMark) and I was agin led to the following commit:
> 
> [ce@localhost mesa]$ git bisect good
> 8b3a257851905ff444d981e52938cbf2b36ba830 is the first bad commit
> commit 8b3a257851905ff444d981e52938cbf2b36ba830
> Author: Marek Olšák 
> Date:   Tue Jul 18 16:08:44 2017 -0400
> 
> radeonsi: set a per-buffer flag that disables inter-process sharing (v4)
> 
> 
> So regardless of different manifestations, this commit seems to introduce
> regressions for antialiased rendering using the Xrender Java2D backend.

8b3a257851905ff444d981e52938cbf2b36ba830 indeed regressed performance, but it
was fixed later. The regression is not reproducible with branches 17.3, 18.0,
and master.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #11 from Michel Dänzer  ---
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/210907/ helps for this benchmark with
the r600 driver, but radeonsi already has the same code...

Clemens, are you still seeing the problem with current Mesa Git master?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #10 from Clemens Eisserer  ---
I bisected the regression again, this time with the benchmark mentioned in the
post above (JXRenderMark) and I was agin led to the following commit:

[ce@localhost mesa]$ git bisect good
8b3a257851905ff444d981e52938cbf2b36ba830 is the first bad commit
commit 8b3a257851905ff444d981e52938cbf2b36ba830
Author: Marek Olšák 
Date:   Tue Jul 18 16:08:44 2017 -0400

radeonsi: set a per-buffer flag that disables inter-process sharing (v4)


So regardless of different manifestations, this commit seems to introduce
regressions for antialiased rendering using the Xrender Java2D backend.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #9 from Clemens Eisserer  ---
So, shmput10 is now equally fast with Mesa-17.3.6 and Mesa-27.2.4 - however the
real-world workload still suffers.

Please have a look at http://93.83.133.214/downloads/JXRenderMark-1.0.1.zip -
it is a stand-alone benchmark which emulates the XRender sequences generated by
the Java XRender backend.

CentOS-7 + updates (Mesa 17.0.1):
./render 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32
18621.335408 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32
18901.781304 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32
18903.572785 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32

Fedora 27 + updates (Mesa 17.3.6):
./render 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32
[ce@localhost temp]$ ./JXRenderMark-1.0.1 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32 3 32
6938.738245 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32
6825.050537 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32
6955.692404 Ops/s; put composition (!); 32x32

So there it is ... the slowdown of factor 2,5 :/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #8 from Clemens Eisserer  ---
> If somebody wants to improve this, 
> the place to start is probably glamor rather than the drivers.

I wonder, what could glamor do better (especially for small uploads) than call
into glTexSubImage2D?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #7 from Michel Dänzer  ---
(In reply to Clemens Eisserer from comment #6)
> This still leaves the question to be answered, how/why the nvidia blob can
> be magnitudes faster for XPutImage based workloads.

If somebody wants to improve this, the place to start is probably glamor rather
than the drivers.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #6 from Clemens Eisserer  ---
Strange, after tinkering around with my system, I cannot reproduce the issue
anymore. Even with Mesa-17.3.x x11perf -shnmput10 is now at ~70-80kOps/s - so
maybe it was a configuration issue that was somehow triggered by the commit in
question?

This still leaves the question to be answered, how/why the nvidia blob can be
magnitudes faster for XPutImage based workloads.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #5 from Dieter Nützel  ---
Marek,

any ideas?
My Polaris 20 is somewhat faster, but by no means like Nvidia blob.
git revert xxx do NOT work, clean.

Someone on Phoronix mentioned that fglrx was even much faster then Mesa git
before your commit.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

--- Comment #4 from Clemens Eisserer  ---
just some unrelated, interesting numbers:

Sync time adjustment is 0.0355 msecs.
800 reps @   0.0012 msec (816000.0/sec): ShmPutImage 10x10 square
800 reps @   0.0012 msec (818000.0/sec): ShmPutImage 10x10 square

These are the results achieved by a Geforce-8800GTS (11 years old dGPU) using
the proprietary driver in the same system.

Confirms my subjective experience - the glamor based open-source driver stack
is really slow for some operations. It seems the proprietary nvidia driver has
way lower driver overhead (considering the 10x10 putimage won't saturate the
GPU).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

Emil Velikov  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords||bisected, regression
 CC||mar...@gmail.com

--- Comment #3 from Emil Velikov  ---
Thanks for the bisection Clemens.

For the future feel free to add the commit author/reviewer in the CC list. It
should help flag the issue amongst the dozens of others.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are the QA Contact for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev

[Mesa-dev] [Bug 105171] performance regression (3x slower) running glamor with PutImage workload (radeonsi)

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105171

Clemens Eisserer  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 QA Contact|dri-devel@lists.freedesktop |mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.
   |.org|org
   Assignee|dri-devel@lists.freedesktop |mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.
   |.org|org
Summary|Performance regression  |performance regression (3x
   |running glamor with |slower) running glamor with
   |PutImage workload   |PutImage workload
   ||(radeonsi)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev