Re: [PATCH v1] drm/xe/guc: Allow GuC CT for wedged device

["Laguna, Lukasz" <lukasz.laguna@intel.com>]

On 8/21/2026 14:21, Raag Jadav wrote:
> Commit 50fa9acac26f ("drm/xe/guc: distinguish wedged from recoverable
> cancellation") introduced distinguishable error codes for g2h failure
> cases, but also blocked GuC CT for wedged device. This is problematic
> in cases where we want to prevent user from accessing the device but
> also keep GuC CT functioning on temporarily wedged device. First user
> of such requirement is PCIe FLR handling where we require uC firmware
> loading while the device is temporarily wedged.
>
> Fixes: 50fa9acac26f ("drm/xe/guc: distinguish wedged from recoverable cancellation")
> Signed-off-by: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c | 8 --------
>   1 file changed, 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c
> index 5c4733da385c..97e38147effd 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_ct.c
> @@ -1062,11 +1062,6 @@ static int __guc_ct_send_locked(struct xe_guc_ct *ct, const u32 *action,
>   	xe_gt_assert(gt, g2h_len || !num_g2h);
>   	lockdep_assert_held(&ct->lock);
>   
> -	if (xe_device_wedged(ct_to_xe(ct))) {
> -		ret = -ENOTRECOVERABLE;
> -		goto out;
> -	}
> -
>   	if (unlikely(ct->ctbs.h2g.info.broken)) {
>   		ret = -EPIPE;
>   		goto out;
> @@ -1813,9 +1808,6 @@ static int g2h_read(struct xe_guc_ct *ct, u32 *msg, bool fast_path)
>   	xe_gt_assert(gt, xe_guc_ct_initialized(ct));
>   	lockdep_assert_held(&ct->fast_lock);
>   
> -	if (xe_device_wedged(xe))
> -		return -ENOTRECOVERABLE;
> -
>   	if (ct->state == XE_GUC_CT_STATE_DISABLED)
>   		return -ENODEV;
>   

There's also third instance in guc_ct_send_recv().

Shouldn't we distinguish between temporary and permanent wedge here 
rather than removing the checks entirely?

And it looks like it should be a part of the FLR series. This patch 
doesn't make sense without this series, and FLR series doesn't work 
without it.
I'm also not sure if it deserves the fixes tag, it wasn't broken at the 
time.

Lukasz