Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Workaround For Graphics Driver Regression: "The Platform Problem Going Crazy"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Intel Workaround For Graphics Driver Regression: "The Platform Problem Going Crazy"

    Phoronix: Intel Workaround For Graphics Driver Regression: "The Platform Problem Going Crazy"

    Sent out over the weekend was a patch series for the Intel Linux kernel graphics driver entitled "Time, where did it go?" This set of 42 patches aims to provide incremental improvements to the driver to offset a performance regression in Linux 5.7 that Intel hasn't been able to track down. This this increased complication of the driver to offset the regression is now under the microscope...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    Call me crazy, but isn't this exactly what kernel bisection is for?

    Comment


    • #3
      I am a bit surprised that this wasn't caught and fixed earlier as Intel puts much effort into CI testing their stack.

      Comment


      • #4
        Yup, with today's (early) state of 5.9, I've now got a kernel warning for i915 :
        Code:
        [ 3.892417] ------------[ cut here ]------------
        [ 3.892421] i915 0000:00:02.0: drm_WARN_ON_ONCE(level >= n_entries)
        [ 3.892595] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 113 at drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c:1065 intel_ddi_pre_enable+0xd37/0xdb0 [i915]
        [ 3.892596] Modules linked in: mmc_block i915 rtsx_pci_sdmmc mmc_core cec i2c_algo_bit drm_kms_helper syscopyarea sysfillrect sysimgblt fb_sys_fops e1000e drm crc32c_intel serio_raw ptp rtsx_pci pps_core wmi$
        [ 3.892619] CPU: 0 PID: 113 Comm: kworker/u16:3 Not tainted 5.9.0rc0.2user+ #174
        Update - the bug is when connecting an external monitor. It's a regression sometime since 5.3.11
        Last edited by Widefox; 08 August 2020, 03:05 PM. Reason: update - the bug is when connecting an external monitor. It's a regression sometime since 5.3.11

        Comment


        • #5
          This is a hard NAK for this sort of refactoring
          What's NAK?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by cl333r View Post
            What's NAK?
            en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NAK "negative-acknowledgement (NAK or NACK) signal is sent to reject a previously received message or to indicate some kind of error"

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by cl333r View Post
              What's NAK?
              I think a NAK is the opposite of approval for changes. I imagine he thinks a hurried and messy refactor was done for intel's GFX as a knee jerk reaction to a performance regression. In effect, he's saying no to any present or future refactoring of this type.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by cl333r View Post
                What's NAK?
                negative/no acknowledge -- basically saying it isn't accepted.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Quite interesting - my desktop performance regressed quite a lot when upgrading from Fedora 31 -> 32.
                  However, with the update changing basically everything from kernel to mesa to userspace/xorg/compositor version, I was unable to track the culprit down.

                  However, having an old 1st gen Intel HD graphics (arrandale) chip, I guess nobody would care a lot finding the root cause of the issue.
                  Funny, other regressions also seem to pop up for newer platforms.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I don’t understand. Each of these patches is an improvement in itself, regardless of the regression, right? Each of these patches has a commit message that makes sense. And what happens is the DRM maintainer basically says “no, the kernel will not get these performance improvements, never ever”.

                    WTF?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X