From: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com>
To: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org,
Matt Roper <matthew.d.roper@intel.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
Francois Dugast <francois.dugast@intel.com>,
Maarten Lankhorst <dev@lankhorst.se>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] drm/xe: Cleanup unwind of gt initialization
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2025 10:09:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z58oMTJcu1E0WiCK@black.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <lliho4ci6gi5spxxelttgqntbh7rxr4utg4dgfevlrdy54phrh@2k4mjuofaqye>
On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 09:55:47AM -0600, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 01, 2025 at 08:24:50AM +0200, Raag Jadav wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 02:31:38PM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> > > Move the xe_gt_remove() to be handled by xe_gt.c itself so the caller,
> > > xe_device_probe() doesn't have to unwind the gt loop. It's also more in
> > > line with the xe_device_probe() style.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c | 21 ++-----------------
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++------------------
> > > drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt.h | 1 -
> > > 3 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> > > index e519f435b1606..bea626f6b4cbf 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> > > @@ -743,7 +743,6 @@ int xe_device_probe(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > struct xe_tile *tile;
> > > struct xe_gt *gt;
> > > int err;
> > > - u8 last_gt;
> > > u8 id;
> > >
> > > xe_pat_init_early(xe);
> > > @@ -851,18 +850,16 @@ int xe_device_probe(struct xe_device *xe)
> > > return err;
> > >
> > > for_each_gt(gt, xe, id) {
> > > - last_gt = id;
> > > -
> > > err = xe_gt_init(gt);
> > > if (err)
> > > - goto err_fini_gt;
> > > + return err;
> >
> > So it's either all or nothing? Can't we operate with atleast what we have?
>
> it was already like that, this is just moving the check to be in a
> better place.
>
> But yes, we've decided long ago that it's better to fail early and fix
> it rather than having semi-working driver in production.
Sure, makes sense.
Reviewed-by: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-02 8:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-31 22:31 [PATCH 0/7] Cleanup error handling on probe Lucas De Marchi
2025-01-31 22:31 ` [PATCH 1/7] drm/xe: Fix xe_display_fini() calls Lucas De Marchi
2025-02-03 20:32 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2025-01-31 22:31 ` [PATCH 2/7] drm/xe: Fix error handling in xe_irq_install() Lucas De Marchi
2025-02-03 20:36 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2025-01-31 22:31 ` [PATCH 3/7] drm/xe: Fix xe_tile_init_noalloc() error propagation Lucas De Marchi
2025-02-03 14:21 ` Francois Dugast
2025-01-31 22:31 ` [PATCH 4/7] drm/xe: Stop ignoring errors from xe_ttm_stolen_mgr_init() Lucas De Marchi
2025-02-03 14:10 ` Francois Dugast
2025-01-31 22:31 ` [PATCH 5/7] drm/xe: Cleanup unwind of gt initialization Lucas De Marchi
2025-02-01 6:24 ` Raag Jadav
2025-02-01 15:55 ` Lucas De Marchi
2025-02-02 8:09 ` Raag Jadav [this message]
2025-01-31 22:31 ` [PATCH 6/7] drm/xe: Cleanup extra calls to xe_hw_fence_irq_finish() Lucas De Marchi
2025-02-03 21:46 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2025-01-31 22:31 ` [PATCH 7/7] drm/xe: Move oa fini to xe_oa Lucas De Marchi
2025-01-31 22:37 ` ✓ CI.Patch_applied: success for Cleanup error handling on probe Patchwork
2025-01-31 22:37 ` ✓ CI.checkpatch: " Patchwork
2025-01-31 22:38 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: " Patchwork
2025-01-31 22:55 ` ✓ CI.Build: " Patchwork
2025-01-31 22:57 ` ✓ CI.Hooks: " Patchwork
2025-01-31 22:59 ` ✓ CI.checksparse: " Patchwork
2025-01-31 23:32 ` ✗ Xe.CI.BAT: failure " Patchwork
2025-02-01 8:05 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: " Patchwork
2025-02-03 18:39 ` [PATCH 0/7] " Lucas De Marchi
2025-02-04 8:58 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2025-02-04 14:50 ` Lucas De Marchi
2025-02-04 18:10 ` Tvrtko Ursulin
2025-02-04 22:42 ` Rodrigo Vivi
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=Z58oMTJcu1E0WiCK@black.fi.intel.com \
--to=raag.jadav@intel.com \
--cc=dev@lankhorst.se \
--cc=francois.dugast@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=matthew.d.roper@intel.com \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
/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