On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 11:54:57AM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote: > 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
For other reasons I was unable to collect sufficient performance data. The commit is in master (c1e38ad37042b0ec261eb0ba5631b7ff0ee7a9da). I think without performance data we should probably leave it out of stable. As a side note, if this patch does anything but help our current workloads it'd be really interesting... _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
