Re: [PATCH v5 4/9] drm/xe/xe_survivability: Refactor survivability mode

[Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com>]

On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 04:17:24PM +0530, Riana Tauro wrote:
> The patches in these series refactor the boot survivability code to
> allow adding runtime survivability
> Refactor existing code to separate both the modes

Punctuations please!

> This patch renames the functions and separates init and enable

...

>  static ssize_t survivability_mode_show(struct device *dev,
>  				       struct device_attribute *attr, char *buff)
>  {
> @@ -130,6 +138,11 @@ static ssize_t survivability_mode_show(struct device *dev,
>  	struct xe_survivability_info *info = survivability->info;
>  	int index = 0, count = 0;
>  
> +	count += sysfs_emit_at(buff, count, "Survivability mode type: Boot\n");

Although I'm okay with this but, should we make it something more parseable
from userspace?

> +	if (!check_boot_failure(xe))
> +		return count;
> +

...

> +int xe_survivability_mode_boot_enable(struct xe_device *xe)
>  {
>  	struct xe_survivability *survivability = &xe->survivability;
> -	struct xe_survivability_info *info;
>  	struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(xe->drm.dev);
> +	int ret;
>  
>  	if (!xe_survivability_mode_is_requested(xe))
>  		return 0;
>  
> -	survivability->size = MAX_SCRATCH_MMIO;
> -
> -	info = devm_kcalloc(xe->drm.dev, survivability->size, sizeof(*info),
> -			    GFP_KERNEL);
> -	if (!info)
> -		return -ENOMEM;
> -
> -	survivability->info = info;
> -
> -	populate_survivability_info(xe);
> +	ret = init_survivability_mode(xe);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
>  
> -	/* Only log debug information and exit if it is a critical failure */
> +	/* Log breadcrumbs but do not enter survivability mode for Critical boot errors */
>  	if (survivability->boot_status == CRITICAL_FAILURE) {
>  		log_survivability_info(pdev);

I'm not much informed about the history here, but should we be logging the
scratchs if we consider them sensitive?

Raag