Re: [PATCH] drm/msm/adreno: Add support for Adreno 505 GPU

[Barnabás Czémán]

On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 7:38 PM Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 6/4/24 19:33, Barnabás Czémán wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 7:06 PM Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 6/4/24 18:45, Barnabás Czémán wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 2:27 PM Barnabás Czémán <trabarni@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 1:55 PM Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 6/4/24 02:20, Barnabás Czémán wrote:
> >>>>>> From: Daniil Titov <daniilt971@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This GPU is found on SoCs such as MSM8937 (450 MHz), MSM8940 (475 MHz),
> >>>>>> SDM439 (650 MHz).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Daniil Titov <daniilt971@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Barnabás Czémán <trabarni@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This all looks very good, just a nit
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [...]
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> +             /*
> >>>>>> +              * Increase inactive period to 250 to avoid bouncing
> >>>>>> +              * the GDSC which appears to make it grumpy
> >>>>>> +              */
> >>>>>> +             .inactive_period = 250,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Are you sure this is actually necessary?
> >>>> Every A5XX GPU is using the same value, but i have never tried with
> >>>> DRM_MSM_INACTIVE_PERIOD.
> >>> This was the original patch
> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20180507224750.9383-1-jcrouse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> >>> where the inactive period was increased for a530. I cannot test
> >>> suspend on msm8937 yet.
> >>
> >> The suspend here refers to device suspend, not system suspend. Adreno
> >> goes into device suspend every time you stop using it, i.e. after the
> >> rendering is done and there's no more work to do.
> >>
> >> I suppose a good test scenario here would be to keep running and closing
> >> kmscube in a rapid fashion and checking if the GPU starts crashing for
> >> unknown reasons (the dmesg would denote that)
> >>
> > I have checked on a505 and a506 with this small script
> > while true; do kmscube; kill kmscube; done
> > none of them crashing, so i am going to change it.
>
> Hmm.. not sure if it actually idled when tested in a tight loop.. If you're
> running bash, try "while true; do kmscube &; sleep 0.08; pkill -f kmscube; sleep 0.08;done"
>
I see no crash
> Konrad