From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
To: Riana Tauro <riana.tauro@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>, <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>,
<lucas.demarchi@intel.com>, <aravind.iddamsetty@linux.intel.com>,
<raag.jadav@intel.com>, <umesh.nerlige.ramappa@intel.com>,
<frank.scarbrough@intel.com>, <sk.anirban@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] drm/xe/xe_survivability: Add support for Runtime survivability mode
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2025 17:40:20 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aGWnRGeEeznxW4Xa@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250702141118.3564242-4-riana.tauro@intel.com>
On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 07:41:13PM +0530, Riana Tauro wrote:
> Certain runtime firmware errors can cause the device to be wedged
> requiring a firmware flash to restore normal operation.
> Runtime Survivability Mode indicates that a firmware flash is necessary to
> recover the device.
>
> The below sysfs is an indication that device is in survivability mode
>
> /sys/bus/pci/devices/<device>/surivability_mode
>
> Signed-off-by: Riana Tauro <riana.tauro@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c | 2 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.h | 4 ++-
> .../gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode_types.h | 8 ++++++
> 4 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> index 4a38486dccc8..5defa54ccd26 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> @@ -716,7 +716,7 @@ int xe_device_probe_early(struct xe_device *xe)
> * possible, but still return the previous error for error
> * propagation
> */
> - err = xe_survivability_mode_enable(xe);
> + err = xe_survivability_mode_enable(xe, XE_SURVIVABILITY_TYPE_BOOT);
> if (err)
> return err;
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c
> index 1f710b3fc599..e1adcb33c9b0 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c
> @@ -129,7 +129,10 @@ static ssize_t survivability_mode_show(struct device *dev,
> struct xe_survivability_info *info = survivability->info;
> int index = 0, count = 0;
>
> - for (index = 0; index < MAX_SCRATCH_MMIO; index++) {
> + count += sysfs_emit_at(buff, count, "Survivability mode: %s\n",
> + survivability->type ? "Runtime" : "Boot");
> +
> + for (index = 0; survivability->boot_status && index < MAX_SCRATCH_MMIO; index++) {
> if (info[index].reg)
> count += sysfs_emit_at(buff, count, "%s: 0x%x - 0x%x\n", info[index].name,
> info[index].reg, info[index].value);
> @@ -169,6 +172,10 @@ static int enable_survivability_mode(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> + /* Only create sysfs for runtime survivability mode */
> + if (xe_survivability_mode_is_runtime(xe))
> + return 0;
I'm double confused here:
only create when runtime, but then you return if runtime?
why to only create on runtime mode? or why to skip here?
> +
> /* Make sure xe_heci_gsc_init() knows about survivability mode */
> survivability->mode = true;
>
> @@ -189,6 +196,17 @@ static int enable_survivability_mode(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +/**
> + * xe_survivability_mode_is_runtime - check if survivability mode is runtime
> + * @xe: xe device instance
> + *
> + * Returns true if in runtime survivability mode, false otherwise
> + */
> +bool xe_survivability_mode_is_runtime(struct xe_device *xe)
> +{
> + return xe->survivability.type == XE_SURVIVABILITY_TYPE_RUNTIME;
> +}
> +
> /**
> * xe_survivability_mode_is_enabled - check if survivability mode is enabled
> * @xe: xe device instance
> @@ -251,16 +269,18 @@ bool xe_survivability_mode_is_requested(struct xe_device *xe)
> * Return: 0 if survivability mode is enabled or not requested; negative error
> * code otherwise.
> */
> -int xe_survivability_mode_enable(struct xe_device *xe)
> +int xe_survivability_mode_enable(struct xe_device *xe, const enum xe_survivability_type type)
> {
> struct xe_survivability *survivability = &xe->survivability;
> struct xe_survivability_info *info;
> struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(xe->drm.dev);
>
> - if (!xe_survivability_mode_is_requested(xe))
> + if (!xe_survivability_mode_is_requested(xe) &&
> + type != XE_SURVIVABILITY_TYPE_RUNTIME)
with this, the function name and its reasoning above is incorrect.
"xe_survivability_mode_enable - Initialize and enable the survivability mode"
no, this function is not doing that anymore. Rather it is getting log
from fw about the boot survivability, or at least initializing the
struct for that. It probably deserves a refactor with some better
naming on the purpose.
> return 0;
>
> survivability->size = MAX_SCRATCH_MMIO;
> + survivability->type = type;
>
> info = devm_kcalloc(xe->drm.dev, survivability->size, sizeof(*info),
> GFP_KERNEL);
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.h
> index 02231c2bf008..559d1e99b03a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.h
> @@ -9,9 +9,11 @@
> #include <linux/types.h>
>
> struct xe_device;
> +enum xe_survivability_type;
>
> -int xe_survivability_mode_enable(struct xe_device *xe);
> +int xe_survivability_mode_enable(struct xe_device *xe, const enum xe_survivability_type);
> bool xe_survivability_mode_is_enabled(struct xe_device *xe);
> +bool xe_survivability_mode_is_runtime(struct xe_device *xe);
> bool xe_survivability_mode_is_requested(struct xe_device *xe);
>
> #endif /* _XE_SURVIVABILITY_MODE_H_ */
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode_types.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode_types.h
> index 19d433e253df..01f07d9c4124 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode_types.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode_types.h
> @@ -9,6 +9,11 @@
> #include <linux/limits.h>
> #include <linux/types.h>
>
> +enum xe_survivability_type {
> + XE_SURVIVABILITY_TYPE_BOOT,
> + XE_SURVIVABILITY_TYPE_RUNTIME,
> +};
> +
> struct xe_survivability_info {
> char name[NAME_MAX];
> u32 reg;
> @@ -30,6 +35,9 @@ struct xe_survivability {
>
> /** @mode: boolean to indicate survivability mode */
> bool mode;
> +
> + /** @type: survivability mode type (boot or runtime) */
> + enum xe_survivability_type type;
> };
>
> #endif /* _XE_SURVIVABILITY_MODE_TYPES_H_ */
> --
> 2.47.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-02 21:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-02 14:11 [PATCH v3 0/7] Handle Firmware reported Hardware Errors Riana Tauro
2025-07-02 14:11 ` [PATCH v3 1/7] drm: Add a vendor-specific recovery method to device wedged uevent Riana Tauro
2025-07-03 4:06 ` Raag Jadav
2025-07-03 5:20 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-03 6:40 ` Raag Jadav
2025-07-03 6:50 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-02 14:11 ` [PATCH v3 2/7] drm/xe: Set GT as wedged before sending " Riana Tauro
2025-07-02 21:41 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2025-07-03 4:18 ` Raag Jadav
2025-07-03 5:18 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-03 6:45 ` Raag Jadav
2025-07-07 6:44 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-02 14:11 ` [PATCH v3 3/7] drm/xe/xe_survivability: Add support for Runtime survivability mode Riana Tauro
2025-07-02 21:40 ` Rodrigo Vivi [this message]
2025-07-03 5:16 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-02 23:33 ` kernel test robot
2025-07-09 18:04 ` Summers, Stuart
2025-07-10 5:27 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-15 17:30 ` Summers, Stuart
2025-07-02 14:11 ` [PATCH v3 4/7] drm/xe/doc: Document device wedged and runtime survivability Riana Tauro
2025-07-02 13:55 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-03 7:19 ` Raag Jadav
2025-07-02 14:11 ` [PATCH v3 5/7] drm/xe: Add support to handle hardware errors Riana Tauro
2025-07-09 17:27 ` Summers, Stuart
2025-07-10 5:54 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-02 14:11 ` [PATCH v3 6/7] drm/xe/xe_hw_error: Handle CSC Firmware reported Hardware errors Riana Tauro
2025-07-02 21:35 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2025-07-03 5:28 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-09 17:57 ` Summers, Stuart
2025-07-10 5:38 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-02 14:11 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] drm/xe/xe_hw_error: Add fault injection to trigger csc error handler Riana Tauro
2025-07-02 15:53 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for Handle Firmware reported Hardware Errors (rev3) Patchwork
2025-07-02 15:54 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-07-02 16:17 ` ✗ CI.checksparse: warning " Patchwork
2025-07-02 16:39 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2025-07-04 6:45 ` ✗ 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=aGWnRGeEeznxW4Xa@intel.com \
--to=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=anshuman.gupta@intel.com \
--cc=aravind.iddamsetty@linux.intel.com \
--cc=frank.scarbrough@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=raag.jadav@intel.com \
--cc=riana.tauro@intel.com \
--cc=sk.anirban@intel.com \
--cc=umesh.nerlige.ramappa@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