From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56522EB64DA for ; Wed, 5 Jul 2023 14:17:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D43210E36C; Wed, 5 Jul 2023 14:17:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C87B910E36C for ; Wed, 5 Jul 2023 14:17:31 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1688566651; x=1720102651; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to: references:mime-version; bh=I6vzWSpdAG306p3Yk/UP5VGiy46s/pD2Qa3DWebaouU=; b=FC3HmZnBegNiAHQeL2II1JknkBj70urm33DHT4lxijsf7xqtAVTgkOPi dP/+VIKe5RmmMC0nXGjR5guwthZdyrQL8vtSG4fInUcncMjPxaUgCvmHi fU+gLxslrkRLCmFIr0kWAG2gtvIBDEq6mZGlNIaSJSRYslksn+3SoJC0p Djnk4tBMmLMusMN6sUC+vA3+wDP4eRdrsqgZcyubyupSg8BAOD7yeWGme J2HckVT9hQaN2jCCK6vR5/eH992iOgb07muIwAhajk4BCj+l5jEkcFyON O2TCXCrO7tXuSGI3RM5de3NY6Vw2j/KDI5WtorFMiyhmgzjKU29vryHtV Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10762"; a="429386180" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,183,1684825200"; d="scan'208";a="429386180" Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Jul 2023 07:17:26 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10762"; a="784564840" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,183,1684825200"; d="scan'208";a="784564840" Received: from adixit-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO adixit-arch.intel.com) ([10.209.1.248]) by fmsmga008-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Jul 2023 07:17:25 -0700 Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2023 07:06:19 -0700 Message-ID: <87y1jucv1g.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> From: "Dixit, Ashutosh" To: Tejas Upadhyay In-Reply-To: <20230705084403.3922130-1-tejas.upadhyay@intel.com> References: <20230705084403.3922130-1-tejas.upadhyay@intel.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/28.2 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Subject: Re: [Intel-xe] [PATCH V2] drm/xe: make GT sysfs init return void X-BeenThere: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel Xe graphics driver List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Andi Shyti , intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, Nirmoy Das Errors-To: intel-xe-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-xe" On Wed, 05 Jul 2023 01:44:03 -0700, Tejas Upadhyay wrote: > > Currently return from xe_gt_sysfs_init() is ignored > and also a failure in xe_gt_sysfs_init() isn't fatal > so make it return void. But why is the failure not fatal? I really don't understand the concept of these non-fatal failures. Do we really want to say the device is up if sysfs initialization has failed for some reason and people are unable to see card freq's e.g.? This was done in i915 but do we really want to repeat this for xe? IMO the simplest thing to do would be to fail the probe unless ALL required/intended functionality is clearly up. Instead of ignoring the return, fail the probe? Thanks. -- Ashutosh