Re: [PATCH v3 02/12] drm/xe/cper: Retrieve the error counter record for CPER reporting

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

On Sun, Sep 06, 2026 at 10:56:07PM +0530, Badal Nilawar wrote:
> Retrieve error counter record required to build a CPER record when
> one not provided by the caller.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_cper.c |  15 ++++++
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ras.c  | 100 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ras.h  |   3 ++
>  3 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_cper.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_cper.c
> index e8017e3ee3a0..f04a91223a43 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_cper.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_cper.c
> @@ -9,6 +9,8 @@
>  
>  #include "xe_cper.h"
>  #include "xe_device.h"
> +#include "xe_printk.h"
> +#include "xe_ras.h"
>  #include "xe_ras_types.h"
>  
>  /**
> @@ -26,6 +28,8 @@ void xe_emit_hardware_error_cper(struct pci_dev *pdev, int cper_sev, enum xe_sig
>  				 struct xe_ras_get_counter_response *response)
>  {
>  	struct xe_device *xe = pdev_to_xe_device(pdev);
> +	struct xe_ras_get_counter_response local_resp = {};
> +	struct xe_ras_get_counter_response *counter_response = response;
>  
>  	if (!xe)
>  		return;
> @@ -33,5 +37,16 @@ void xe_emit_hardware_error_cper(struct pci_dev *pdev, int cper_sev, enum xe_sig
>  	if ((int)sigid >= INTEL_SIGID_GPU_XE_HARDWARE_START)
>  		return;
>  
> +	if (!counter || !xe_ras_counter_is_valid(xe, counter))

Why? Should we even be at this point without a valid counter?

> +		return;
> +
> +	if (!counter_response) {
> +		counter_response = &local_resp;
> +		if (xe_ras_get_counter_response(xe, counter, counter_response)) {

Dumb question, shouldn't the whole xe_emit_hardware_error_cper() be the
consequence of get_counter() and not the other way around?

Raag

> +			xe_err(xe, "[RAS]: CPER: failed to get counter, skipping record\n");
> +			return;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
>  	/* TODO */
>  }