Re: [PATCH] drm/xe: Prefer BIT/GENMASK macros over shifts

[Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>]

On 23.01.2024 20:02, Matthew Brost wrote:
> Using BIT/GENMASK macros is a better convention than using manual shift
> and will also fix build errors [1].
> 
> [1] http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/buildresult/15112475/log/

commit message and diff doesn't match (missed patch ?)

and the actual problem was only due to missed "u" suffix in
GUC_CTB_MSG_0_FENCE and GUC_HXG_MSG_0_ORIGIN definitions (as using 0x
notation alone really doesn't make those integer definitions unsigned)

note that those were already fixed on i915 by commit 962bd34bb457f6353f
and discussed here in [1]

[1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/573620/?series=128312&rev=1

> 
> Fixes: dd08ebf6c352 ("drm/xe: Introduce a new DRM driver for Intel GPUs")
> Cc: Thomas Hellström <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c    | 2 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_relay.c | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c
> index ee5d99456aeb..fc5cc2b2bcc5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c
> @@ -866,7 +866,7 @@ static int parse_g2h_response(struct xe_guc_ct *ct, u32 *msg, u32 len)
>  	 */
>  	if (fence & CT_SEQNO_UNTRACKED) {
>  		if (type == GUC_HXG_TYPE_RESPONSE_FAILURE)
> -			xe_gt_err(gt, "FAST_REQ H2G fence 0x%x failed! e=0x%x, h=%u\n",
> +			xe_gt_err(gt, "FAST_REQ H2G fence 0x%x failed! e=0x%lx, h=%lu\n",
>  				  fence,
>  				  FIELD_GET(GUC_HXG_FAILURE_MSG_0_ERROR, hxg[0]),
>  				  FIELD_GET(GUC_HXG_FAILURE_MSG_0_HINT, hxg[0]));
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_relay.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_relay.c
> index c0a2d8d5d3b3..2d1f19270d9a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_relay.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_relay.c
> @@ -300,7 +300,7 @@ static int relay_send_transaction(struct xe_guc_relay *relay, struct relay_trans
>  		ret = -EPROTO;
>  	}
>  	if (unlikely(ret < 0)) {
> -		relay_notice(relay, "Failed to send %s.%x to GuC (%pe) %*ph ...\n",
> +		relay_notice(relay, "Failed to send %s.%lx to GuC (%pe) %*ph ...\n",
>  			     guc_hxg_type_to_string(FIELD_GET(GUC_HXG_MSG_0_TYPE, buf[0])),
>  			     FIELD_GET(GUC_HXG_REQUEST_MSG_0_ACTION, buf[0]),
>  			     ERR_PTR(ret), (int)sizeof(u32) * txn->offset, buf);