Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v2] drm/i915/guc: Do not complain about stale reset notifications

["Ceraolo Spurio, Daniele" <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>]

On 2/11/2022 5:04 PM, John.C.Harrison@Intel.com wrote:
> From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
>
> It is possible for reset notifications to arrive for a context that is
> in the process of being banned. So don't flag these as an error, just
> report it as informational (because it is still useful to know that
> resets are happening even if they are being ignored).
>
> v2: Better wording for the message (review feedback from Tvrtko).
>
> Signed-off-by: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@Intel.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 8 ++++----
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> index b3a429a92c0d..3afff24b8f24 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> @@ -4022,10 +4022,10 @@ static void guc_handle_context_reset(struct intel_guc *guc,
>   		capture_error_state(guc, ce);
>   		guc_context_replay(ce);
>   	} else {
> -		drm_err(&guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm,
> -			"Invalid GuC engine reset notificaion for 0x%04X on %s: banned = %d, blocked = %d",
> -			ce->guc_id.id, ce->engine->name, intel_context_is_banned(ce),
> -			context_blocked(ce));
> +		drm_info(&guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm,
> +			 "Ignoring context reset notification for 0x%04X on %s: banned = %d, blocked = %d",

The if statement above checks for !banned, so if we're here we're banned 
for sure, no need to print it as if it was conditional. I'd reword it as 
something like: "Ignoring reset notification for banned context 0x%04X 
...". With that:

Reviewed-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com>

Daniele

> +			 ce->guc_id.id, ce->engine->name, intel_context_is_banned(ce),
> +			 context_blocked(ce));
>   	}
>   }
>