Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] drm/xe/guc: Report reset-request failure using SIGID

["Yadav, Arvind" <arvind.yadav@intel.com>]

On 28-08-2026 15:58, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
>
> On 8/28/2026 11:58 AM, Arvind Yadav wrote:
>> Route the GuC engine reset-request failure through the structured SIGID
>> logging helper.
>>
>> Use the GT component for the engine reset-request failure, which maps to
>> XE_SIGID_GT_TDR, and pass -EIO as the errno value.
>>
>> Cc: Mallesh Koujalagi <mallesh.koujalagi@intel.com>
>> Cc: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar@intel.com>
>> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
>> Cc: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com>
>> Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
>> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav@intel.com>
>> ---
>> v4:
>> - Clarified that the GT component maps to XE_SIGID_GT_TDR and -EIO is
>>    only the errno value. (Sashiko)
>>
>> v3:
>> - Split the GuC reset-request failure conversion into a separate patch.
>>    (Michal)
>> - Dropped GuC job-timeout warning conversions to avoid changing warn-level
>>    logs into error-level SIGID reports. (Michal)
>> - Kept only the existing error path that maps naturally to GT_TDR. (Michal)
>>
>> v2:
>>   - Rebased on the latest structured SIGID logging series.
>>   - Switched from the old xe_ras_log_() helpers to the new xe_log_()
>>     helpers.
>>   - Dropped paths already covered by the base SIGID series.
>>
>>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c | 6 ++++--
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
>> index 99d8c807ff05..c1d469624215 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
>> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@
>>   #include "xe_guc_klv_helpers.h"
>>   #include "xe_guc_submit_types.h"
>>   #include "xe_hw_engine.h"
>> +#include "xe_log.h"
>>   #include "xe_lrc.h"
>>   #include "xe_macros.h"
>>   #include "xe_map.h"
>> @@ -3494,8 +3495,9 @@ int xe_guc_exec_queue_reset_failure_handler(struct xe_guc *guc, u32 *msg, u32 le
>>   	reason = msg[2];
>>   
>>   	/* Unexpected failure of a hardware feature, log an actual error */
>> -	xe_gt_err(gt, "GuC engine reset request failed on %d:%d because 0x%08X",
> nit: can we drop "request" word from the message?
> it was not our request that we can refer


Noted,

>
>> -		  guc_class, instance, reason);
>> +	xe_log_err(gt, GT, -EIO,
> I'm still not sure that we should use GT component here
> better to define GUCSUBMIT with GT_TDR as its SIGID
>
> note that while SIGID documentation says we should avoid adding
> new SIGIDs without good reason, we are free to add new components,
> which are separate concept to SIGID, and initial component list
> included in the SIGID introduction series was only "initial" to
> show basic SIGID usages - there might be several components that
> use the same SIGID - see GUC/HUC as most obvious examples


I will add a GUCSUBMIT component mapped to XE_SIGID_GT_TDR and use that 
instead of the generic GT component.

>
>> +		   "GuC engine reset request failed on %d:%d because 0x%08X\n",
>> +		   guc_class, instance, reason);
> with GUCSUBMIT component above message could look like:
>
>   ... SIGID=106 (-EIO) Tile0: GT0: GUCSUBMIT: engine reset ...
>
> vs
>
>   ... SIGID=106 (-EIO) Tile0: GT0: GT: GuC engine reset ...

I will also drop "request" from the message and make it " engine reset 
failed on %d:%d because 0x%08X"


Thanks,
Arvind

>
>>   
>>   	xe_gt_reset_async(gt);
>>