Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Dnyaneshwar Bhadane" <dnyaneshwar.bhadane@intel.com>
Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/12] drm/xe/memirq: Report errors using structured xe_log API
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 19:22:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260819192228.A01461F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260819191442.1957986-6-dnyaneshwar.bhadane@intel.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] Loss of diagnostic precision by downgrading the logging context from tile-level to device-level.
- [Low] The `memirq_err()` macro was left defined in the file despite all its calls being replaced.
--

--- Patch [5]: [PATCH 05/12] drm/xe/memirq: Report errors using structured xe_log API ---
commit 081cec958cab790284a251bc663834e4569a80b2
Author: Dnyaneshwar Bhadane <dnyaneshwar.bhadane@intel.com>

drm/xe/memirq: Report errors using structured xe_log API

This patch replaces memirq_err() calls with xe_log_err() using the
MEMIRQ component tag for memory-based IRQ failures.

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_memirq.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_memirq.c
> index 9dfe965cb46ec..45eae58d418f0 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_memirq.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_memirq.c

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but did you mean to also remove the definition of
the memirq_err() macro at the top of this file? It appears to be
dead code now that all invocations have been replaced.

[ ... ]

> @@ -232,7 +233,7 @@ static int memirq_alloc_pages(struct xe_memirq *memirq)
>  	return 0;
>  
>  out:
> -	memirq_err(memirq, "Failed to allocate memirq page (%pe)\n", ERR_PTR(err));
> +	xe_log_err(xe, MEMIRQ, err, "Failed to allocate memirq page (%pe)\n", ERR_PTR(err));

[Severity: Medium]
Does this change lose diagnostic precision by downgrading the logging
context from tile-level to device-level?

By explicitly passing the xe device instead of the available tile
variable, the location type resolves to the device, omitting the
specific failing tile ID from the structured log.

[ ... ]

> @@ -370,7 +371,7 @@ int xe_memirq_init_guc(struct xe_memirq *memirq, struct xe_guc *guc)
>  	return 0;
>  
>  failed:
> -	memirq_err(memirq, "Failed to setup report pages in %s (%pe)\n",
> +	xe_log_err(memirq_to_xe(memirq), MEMIRQ, err, "Failed to setup report pages in %s (%pe)\n",
>  		   guc_name(guc), ERR_PTR(err));
>  	return err;
>  }

[Severity: Medium]
Similarly, does passing memirq_to_xe(memirq) here instead of resolving
the tile or GT lose subsystem context for this log message?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260819191442.1957986-1-dnyaneshwar.bhadane@intel.com?part=5

  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-19 19:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-19 19:14 [PATCH 00/12] drm/xe: Convert IO_BUS errors to structured xe_log API Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
2026-08-19 19:14 ` [PATCH 01/12] drm/xe/log: Add VRAM, PAT, and HWMON DRIVER_HARDWARE components Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
2026-08-19 19:14 ` [PATCH 02/12] drm/xe/ggtt: Report GGTT errors using structured logging Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
2026-08-19 19:14 ` [PATCH 03/12] drm/xe/hwmon: Report errors using structured xe_log API Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
2026-08-19 19:23   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-19 19:14 ` [PATCH 04/12] drm/xe/mmio: Report BAR mapping " Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
2026-08-19 19:14 ` [PATCH 05/12] drm/xe/memirq: Report " Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
2026-08-19 19:22   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-19 19:14 ` [PATCH 06/12] drm/xe/reg_whitelist: Report whitelist overflow " Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
2026-08-19 19:22   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-19 19:14 ` [PATCH 07/12] drm/xe/reg_sr: Report save-restore errors " Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
2026-08-19 19:14 ` [PATCH 08/12] drm/xe/pat: Assert pat.ops before dereferencing members Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
2026-08-19 19:22   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-19 19:14 ` [PATCH 09/12] drm/xe/pat: Report missing PAT table using structured xe_log API Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
2026-08-19 19:23   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-19 19:14 ` [PATCH 10/12] drm/xe/pci: Report unknown GMDID versions " Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
2026-08-19 19:27   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-19 19:14 ` [PATCH 11/12] drm/xe/lmtt: Report invalidation errors " Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
2026-08-19 19:28   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-19 19:14 ` [PATCH 12/12] drm/xe/vram: Report VRAM " Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
2026-08-19 19:29   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-20  6:06     ` Dnyaneshwar Bhadane
2026-08-19 19:23 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success for drm/xe: Convert IO_BUS errors to " Patchwork
2026-08-19 20:45 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2026-08-20  1:38 ` ✗ Xe.CI.FULL: failure " Patchwork

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=20260819192228.A01461F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=dnyaneshwar.bhadane@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /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