Hi Ben, On 11 September 2015 at 20:15, Ben Widawsky <b...@bwidawsk.net> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 12:12:15PM -0700, Jordan Justen wrote: >> On 2015-09-10 16:59:12, Ben Widawsky wrote: >> > All SKL SKUs except the lowest one which has half the L3 size actually >> > have 384K >> >> These commit message lines seem to wrap a bit long. This first line is >> 80 characters. >> >> > of URB per slice. >> > >> > For once, I can explain how this mistake was made and how it was missed in >> > review... Historically when we enable a platform and put the production >> > sizes, >> > you can simply look at the "smallest" SKU and see what its URB size is >> > (and we >> > assumed it was the 1 slice variant). Since on newer platforms the URB >> > sizes are >> > scaled automatically by HW, this was sufficient. On SKL, this is a bit >> > different >> > as the lowest SKU actually has half of the L3 fused off. GT2 is the 1 >> > slice (not >> > GT1) variant and it has 384K. >> > >> > There are no Jenkins tests fixed (or regressions) and we don't expect any >> > fixes >> > here because you can always run with less URB size - this potentially >> > improves >> > performance. >> >> It would be nice if we were able to find a benchmark that improves >> from this change. If we can't then maybe we should just remove this >> paragraph. It seems like the right change regardless. >> >> Reviewed-by: Jordan Justen <jordan.l.jus...@intel.com> > > I think what I'd like to do is run the perf data to make sure there are at > least > no regressions since I am proposing it for stable... Maybe if I don't get > around > to that before the next stable release, we'll bail on it for 10.6 > Did you get the chance to give this a perf test ? I don't see the commit landing in master, regardless of the mesa-stable tag.
Thanks Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
