From: "Poosa, Karthik" <karthik.poosa@intel.com>
To: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>, <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>,
<badal.nilawar@intel.com>, <raag.jadav@intel.com>,
<riana.tauro@intel.com>, <sk.anirban@intel.com>,
<mallesh.koujalagi@intel.com>, <soham.purkait@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] drm/xe/hwmon: Detect unavailable temperature sensors
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2026 21:19:19 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <052a4e3e-8993-44ec-842f-a500c5268459@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aq0HHDqoXxXFlsam@intel.com>
On 18-09-2026 15:10, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2026 at 11:57:52PM +0530, Karthik Poosa wrote:
>> Add is_temp_available() to validate sensor presence.
>> A temperature reading of 0xFFFFFFF on MMIO and 0xFF from mailbox on CRI
>> platforms indicates that the corresponding sensor is not present and
>> should be treated as unavailable.
>>
>> Use this check from xe_hwmon_temp_is_visible() callback so that attributes
>> for unavailable sensors are not exposed during hwmon device registration.
> I'm afraid this patch is doing much more than what stated here.
> Please split this patch into smaller sections.
> It is likely regressing older platforms becuase it is hard to spot the
> differences.
Sure will split the patch into
1. Add helpers to validate thermal sensor readings
2. Ignore unavailable memory controller sensors and PCIe thermal sensors
3. Consolidate temperature sensor availability checks
>
>> Signed-off-by: Karthik Poosa <karthik.poosa@intel.com>
>> ---
>> v2:
>> - Address review comments from sashiko-bot@kernel.org.
>> - Address review comments for Badal, Raag.
>> - Update is_temp_valid() to check values based on mailbox or MMIO.
>> - Add is_temp_is_visible().
>> - Update is_vram_ch_available() to is_temp_available() to check if sensor
>> is present.
>>
>> v3:
>> - Rephrase a debug log.
>>
>> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hwmon.c | 100 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
>> 1 file changed, 71 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hwmon.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hwmon.c
>> index 5284cab6703d..faed2f5da394 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hwmon.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_hwmon.c
>> @@ -813,12 +813,20 @@ static int xe_hwmon_pcode_read_thermal_info(struct xe_hwmon *hwmon)
>> return ret;
>> }
>>
>> +static inline bool is_temp_valid(const struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, u32 value, bool is_mmio)
>> +{
>> + if (hwmon->xe->info.platform >= XE_CRESCENTISLAND)
>> + return value != (is_mmio ? U32_MAX : U8_MAX);
>> +
>> + return value != 0;
>> +}
> first of all, please use 2 separate functions for this.
> second, you have a bug here and the mailbox logic is never protected s8 is passed,
> so U8_MAX will never work.
>
> LLM suggestion:
>
> static bool mmio_temp_valid(const struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, u32 v)
> {
> return hwmon->xe->info.has_mbx_temp_sentinel ? v != U32_MAX
> : v != 0;
> }
>
> static bool mbx_temp_valid(const struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, s8 v)
> {
> return hwmon->xe->info.has_mbx_temp_sentinel ? v != (s8)0xff
> : v != 0;
> }
>
Actually mailbox temperature is of format, bit 7 i.e MSB for sign and
bit [6:0] bits for magnitude.
So s8 is not right here, In this format, 0xFF represents -127°C, not
-1°C. I shall correct this.
>
>> +
>> static int get_mc_temp(struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, long *val)
>> {
>> struct xe_tile *root_tile = xe_device_get_root_tile(hwmon->xe);
>> u32 *dword = (u32 *)hwmon->temp.value;
>> + int ret, i, count = 0;
>> s32 average = 0;
>> - int ret, i;
>>
>> for (i = 0; i < DIV_ROUND_UP(TEMP_LIMIT_MAX, sizeof(u32)); i++) {
>> ret = xe_pcode_read(root_tile, PCODE_MBOX(PCODE_THERMAL_INFO, READ_THERMAL_DATA, i),
>> @@ -828,11 +836,23 @@ static int get_mc_temp(struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, long *val)
>> drm_dbg(&hwmon->xe->drm, "thermal data for group %d val 0x%x\n", i, dword[i]);
>> }
>>
>> - for (i = TEMP_INDEX_MCTRL; i < hwmon->temp.count - 1; i++)
>> + for (i = TEMP_INDEX_MCTRL; i < hwmon->temp.count - 1; i++) {
>> + if (!is_temp_valid(hwmon, hwmon->temp.value[i], false))
>> + continue;
>> average += hwmon->temp.value[i];
>> + count++;
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (!count) {
>> + drm_dbg(&hwmon->xe->drm, "Memory controller temperature unavailable!\n");
>> + return -ENXIO;
>> + }
>> +
>> + average /= count;
>> +
>> + if (val)
>> + *val = average * MILLIDEGREE_PER_DEGREE;
>>
>> - average /= (hwmon->temp.count - TEMP_INDEX_MCTRL - 1);
>> - *val = average * MILLIDEGREE_PER_DEGREE;
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -852,7 +872,13 @@ static int get_pcie_temp(struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, long *val)
>> data = REG_FIELD_GET(PCIE_SENSOR_MASK, data);
>>
>> data = REG_FIELD_GET(TEMP_MASK, data);
>> - *val = (s8)data * MILLIDEGREE_PER_DEGREE;
>> + if (!is_temp_valid(hwmon, data, false)) {
>> + drm_dbg(&hwmon->xe->drm, "PCIe temperature not available\n");
>> + return -ENXIO;
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (val)
>> + *val = (s8)data * MILLIDEGREE_PER_DEGREE;
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>> @@ -951,19 +977,39 @@ static void xe_hwmon_get_voltage(struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, int channel, long *valu
>> *value = DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(REG_FIELD_GET(VOLTAGE_MASK, reg_val) * 2500, SF_VOLTAGE);
>> }
>>
>> -static inline bool is_vram_ch_available(struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, int channel)
>> +static bool is_temp_available(struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, int channel)
>> {
>> struct xe_mmio *mmio = xe_root_tile_mmio(hwmon->xe);
>> - int vram_id = channel - CHANNEL_VRAM_N;
>> - struct xe_reg vram_reg;
>> + struct xe_reg reg;
>> + u32 reg_val;
>>
>> - vram_reg = xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_TEMP, channel);
>> - if (!xe_reg_is_valid(vram_reg) || !xe_mmio_read32(mmio, vram_reg))
>> - return false;
>> + switch (channel) {
>> + case CHANNEL_PKG:
>> + case CHANNEL_VRAM:
>> + case CHANNEL_VRAM_N...CHANNEL_VRAM_N_MAX:
>> + reg = xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_TEMP, channel);
>> + if (!xe_reg_is_valid(reg))
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + reg_val = xe_mmio_read32(mmio, reg);
>> + if (!is_temp_valid(hwmon, reg_val, true)) {
>> + drm_dbg(&hwmon->xe->drm,
>> + "channel %d temperautre unavailable, val 0x%x\n", channel, reg_val);
> typo
>
>> + return false;
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (channel >= CHANNEL_VRAM_N)
>> + sprintf(hwmon->temp.vram_label[channel - CHANNEL_VRAM_N],
>> + "vram_ch_%d", channel - CHANNEL_VRAM_N);
>>
>> - /* Create label only for available vram channel */
>> - sprintf(hwmon->temp.vram_label[vram_id], "vram_ch_%d", vram_id);
>> - return true;
>> + return true;
>> + case CHANNEL_MCTRL:
>> + return hwmon->temp.count && !get_mc_temp(hwmon, NULL);
>> + case CHANNEL_PCIE:
>> + return hwmon->temp.count && !get_pcie_temp(hwmon, NULL);
>> + default:
>> + return false;
>> + }
>> }
>>
>> static umode_t
>> @@ -973,14 +1019,13 @@ xe_hwmon_temp_is_visible(struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, u32 attr, int channel)
>> case hwmon_temp_emergency:
>> switch (channel) {
>> case CHANNEL_PKG:
>> - return hwmon->temp.limit[TEMP_LIMIT_PKG_SHUTDOWN] ? 0444 : 0;
>> - case CHANNEL_VRAM:
>> - return hwmon->temp.limit[TEMP_LIMIT_MEM_SHUTDOWN] ? 0444 : 0;
>> case CHANNEL_MCTRL:
>> case CHANNEL_PCIE:
>> - return hwmon->temp.count ? 0444 : 0;
>> + return (is_temp_available(hwmon, channel) &&
>> + hwmon->temp.limit[TEMP_LIMIT_PKG_SHUTDOWN]) ? 0444 : 0;
>> + case CHANNEL_VRAM:
>> case CHANNEL_VRAM_N...CHANNEL_VRAM_N_MAX:
>> - return (is_vram_ch_available(hwmon, channel) &&
>> + return (is_temp_available(hwmon, channel) &&
>> hwmon->temp.limit[TEMP_LIMIT_MEM_SHUTDOWN]) ? 0444 : 0;
>> default:
>> return 0;
>> @@ -988,14 +1033,13 @@ xe_hwmon_temp_is_visible(struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, u32 attr, int channel)
>> case hwmon_temp_crit:
>> switch (channel) {
>> case CHANNEL_PKG:
>> - return hwmon->temp.limit[TEMP_LIMIT_PKG_CRIT] ? 0444 : 0;
>> - case CHANNEL_VRAM:
>> - return hwmon->temp.limit[TEMP_LIMIT_MEM_CRIT] ? 0444 : 0;
>> case CHANNEL_MCTRL:
>> case CHANNEL_PCIE:
>> - return hwmon->temp.count ? 0444 : 0;
>> + return (is_temp_available(hwmon, channel) &&
>> + hwmon->temp.limit[TEMP_LIMIT_PKG_CRIT]) ? 0444 : 0;
>> + case CHANNEL_VRAM:
>> case CHANNEL_VRAM_N...CHANNEL_VRAM_N_MAX:
>> - return (is_vram_ch_available(hwmon, channel) &&
>> + return (is_temp_available(hwmon, channel) &&
>> hwmon->temp.limit[TEMP_LIMIT_MEM_CRIT]) ? 0444 : 0;
>> default:
>> return 0;
>> @@ -1003,7 +1047,8 @@ xe_hwmon_temp_is_visible(struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, u32 attr, int channel)
>> case hwmon_temp_max:
>> switch (channel) {
>> case CHANNEL_PKG:
>> - return hwmon->temp.limit[TEMP_LIMIT_PKG_MAX] ? 0444 : 0;
>> + return (is_temp_available(hwmon, channel) &&
>> + hwmon->temp.limit[TEMP_LIMIT_PKG_MAX]) ? 0444 : 0;
>> default:
>> return 0;
>> }
>> @@ -1012,13 +1057,10 @@ xe_hwmon_temp_is_visible(struct xe_hwmon *hwmon, u32 attr, int channel)
>> switch (channel) {
>> case CHANNEL_PKG:
>> case CHANNEL_VRAM:
>> - return xe_reg_is_valid(xe_hwmon_get_reg(hwmon, REG_TEMP,
>> - channel)) ? 0444 : 0;
>> case CHANNEL_MCTRL:
>> case CHANNEL_PCIE:
>> - return hwmon->temp.count ? 0444 : 0;
>> case CHANNEL_VRAM_N...CHANNEL_VRAM_N_MAX:
>> - return is_vram_ch_available(hwmon, channel) ? 0444 : 0;
>> + return is_temp_available(hwmon, channel) ? 0444 : 0;
>> default:
>> return 0;
>> }
>> --
>> 2.25.1
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-23 15:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-10 18:27 [PATCH v3 0/5] drm/xe/hwmon: Update hwmon thermal mailbox handling Karthik Poosa
2026-09-10 18:27 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] drm/xe/hwmon: Detect unavailable temperature sensors Karthik Poosa
2026-09-10 18:42 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-17 11:02 ` Poosa, Karthik
2026-09-18 9:40 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2026-09-23 15:49 ` Poosa, Karthik [this message]
2026-09-10 18:27 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] drm/xe/hwmon: Use VRAM temperature sensor count from thermal config on CRI Karthik Poosa
2026-09-10 18:47 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-18 9:50 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2026-09-10 18:27 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] drm/xe/hwmon: Fix memory controller thermal data handling Karthik Poosa
2026-09-18 10:00 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2026-09-10 18:27 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] drm/xe/hwmon: Decode CRI temperature registers as IEEE-754 Karthik Poosa
2026-09-18 10:13 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2026-09-24 6:54 ` Poosa, Karthik
2026-09-10 18:27 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] drm/xe/hwmon: Disable memory controller and PCIe temperatures on CRI Karthik Poosa
2026-09-18 10:20 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2026-09-23 18:37 ` Poosa, Karthik
2026-09-10 18:47 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success for drm/xe/hwmon: Update hwmon thermal mailbox handling (rev3) Patchwork
2026-09-10 19:52 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2026-09-11 4:49 ` ✓ Xe.CI.FULL: " Patchwork
2026-09-24 11:16 ` [PATCH v3 0/5] drm/xe/hwmon: Update hwmon thermal mailbox handling Poosa, Karthik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=052a4e3e-8993-44ec-842f-a500c5268459@intel.com \
--to=karthik.poosa@intel.com \
--cc=anshuman.gupta@intel.com \
--cc=badal.nilawar@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=mallesh.koujalagi@intel.com \
--cc=raag.jadav@intel.com \
--cc=riana.tauro@intel.com \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=sk.anirban@intel.com \
--cc=soham.purkait@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox