Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/amdgpu: Add kernel parameter support for ignoring bad page threshold

[Luben Tuikov <luben.tuikov@amd.com>]

On 2021-10-21 12:42, Russell, Kent wrote:
> [AMD Official Use Only]
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Tuikov, Luben <Luben.Tuikov@amd.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2021 12:21 PM
>> To: Russell, Kent <Kent.Russell@amd.com>; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
>> Cc: Joshi, Mukul <Mukul.Joshi@amd.com>; Kuehling, Felix <Felix.Kuehling@amd.com>;
>> Tuikov, Luben <Luben.Tuikov@amd.com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/amdgpu: Add kernel parameter support for ignoring bad page
>> threshold
>>
>> On 2021-10-21 11:57, Kent Russell wrote:
>>> When a GPU hits the bad_page_threshold, it will not be initialized by
>>> the amdgpu driver. This means that the table cannot be cleared, nor can
>>> information gathering be performed (getting serial number, BDF, etc).
>>>
>>> If the bad_page_threshold kernel parameter is set to -2,
>>> continue to initialize the GPU, while printing a warning to dmesg that
>>> this action has been done
>>>
>>> Cc: Luben Tuikov <luben.tuikov@amd.com>
>>> Cc: Mukul Joshi <Mukul.Joshi@amd.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kent Russell <kent.russell@amd.com>
>>> Acked-by: Felix Kuehling <Felix.Kuehling@amd.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Luben Tuikov <luben.tuikov@amd.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h            |  1 +
>>>  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c        |  2 +-
>>>  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c | 12 ++++++++----
>>>  3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h
>>> index d58e37fd01f4..b85b67a88a3d 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h
>>> @@ -205,6 +205,7 @@ extern struct amdgpu_mgpu_info mgpu_info;
>>>  extern int amdgpu_ras_enable;
>>>  extern uint amdgpu_ras_mask;
>>>  extern int amdgpu_bad_page_threshold;
>>> +extern bool amdgpu_ignore_bad_page_threshold;
>>>  extern struct amdgpu_watchdog_timer amdgpu_watchdog_timer;
>>>  extern int amdgpu_async_gfx_ring;
>>>  extern int amdgpu_mcbp;
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
>>> index 96bd63aeeddd..eee3cf874e7a 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
>>> @@ -877,7 +877,7 @@ module_param_named(reset_method, amdgpu_reset_method,
>> int, 0444);
>>>   * result in the GPU entering bad status when the number of total
>>>   * faulty pages by ECC exceeds the threshold value.
>>>   */
>>> -MODULE_PARM_DESC(bad_page_threshold, "Bad page threshold(-1 = auto(default
>> value), 0 = disable bad page retirement)");
>>> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(bad_page_threshold, "Bad page threshold(-1 = auto(default
>> value), 0 = disable bad page retirement, -2 = ignore bad page threshold)");
>>>  module_param_named(bad_page_threshold, amdgpu_bad_page_threshold, int, 0444);
>>>
>>>  MODULE_PARM_DESC(num_kcq, "number of kernel compute queue user want to setup
>> (8 if set to greater than 8 or less than 0, only affect gfx 8+)");
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c
>>> index ce5089216474..bd6ed43b0df2 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c
>>> @@ -1104,11 +1104,15 @@ int amdgpu_ras_eeprom_init(struct
>> amdgpu_ras_eeprom_control *control,
>>>  			res = amdgpu_ras_eeprom_correct_header_tag(control,
>>>  								   RAS_TABLE_HDR_VAL);
>>>  		} else {
>>> -			*exceed_err_limit = true;
>>> -			dev_err(adev->dev,
>>> -				"RAS records:%d exceed threshold:%d, "
>>> -				"GPU will not be initialized. Replace this GPU or increase the
>> threshold",
>>> +			dev_err(adev->dev, "RAS records:%d exceed threshold:%d",
>>>  				control->ras_num_recs, ras->bad_page_cnt_threshold);
>> I thought this would all go in a single set of patches. I wasn't aware a singleton patch went
>> in already which changed just this line--this change was always a part of a patch set.
>>
> Ah sorry. When you reviewed the original patch2 clarifying the message, I merged it and then re-submitted the remaining 3 (which pared down to 2) for review. Sorry for the confusion, I was trying to minimize the number of moving parts.

Admittedly, now you have 3 patches, one singleton and two coming in. Would've probably be best to submit only the current two.

No worries for now--for the future.

Regards,
Luben

>
>  Kent
>
>> Regards,
>> Luben
>>
>>> +			if (amdgpu_bad_page_threshold == -2) {
>>> +				dev_warn(adev->dev, "GPU will be initialized due to
>> bad_page_threshold = -2.");
>>> +				res = 0;
>>> +			} else {
>>> +				*exceed_err_limit = true;
>>> +				dev_err(adev->dev, "GPU will not be initialized. Replace this
>> GPU or increase the threshold.");
>>> +			}
>>>  		}
>>>  	} else {
>>>  		DRM_INFO("Creating a new EEPROM table");