On 07/04/2013 11:46 AM, Ben Widawsky wrote:
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 08:43:58PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Ben Widawsky <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 08:14:41PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 11:02:07AM -0700, Ben Widawsky wrote:
To make users life a little easier figuring out what they have on their
system.
Ideally, I'd really like to report LLC size, but it turned out to be a
bit of a pain. Maybe I'll revisit it in the future.
Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <[email protected]>
I think a getparam for eLLC would be neat, so that usespace can use it to
tune working set sizes.
-Daniel
And I assume drop debugfs?
Yeah, I guess the DRM_INFO message in dmesg should be good enough
then. For userspace's convenience we could even look into exposing the
LLC size with a getparam.
-Daniel
I would like to do this since we have easy access to cpuid. I know Chad
really wants it. If you'll accept the patch, I'll write it.
I really want to know the cache sizes.
Actually, I didn't expect the kernel to do this for me. So, I've prototyped
a patch for Mesa to probe the cache sizes with CPUID. If the
kernel does that for Mesa, then I can likely drop my Mesa patch.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
