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 01290C79FB9 for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 13:19:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3C1010E5E6; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 13:19:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: gabe.freedesktop.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="ceUUcR1f"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.13]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E45C610E5E6 for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 13:19:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1789046374; x=1820582374; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=qOtxpPSw6Np74L4N3ey8NcaiAcJO76HsEcj28emx+4I=; b=ceUUcR1f4ME9WuYix+FxRDYDO3O8Nl4AWQOzuNA48ANWJYCE7lyCcB4M Sg2DhZXtoguaNasa1qyoF/UtyhsqXRPTaFj5ykSWKnhgv6cjq494FBXiO r35+8U0x86HSoxUjysKCYuoVL+i6wU5DQjfotI+WzmzDlYtK7N3yqY8Qt zqdmPjT4ObyTiPZ0Sd3zDS4YmNuBfVwKRhMla9/9lyYd66Uqmt6DZjePH t2TYsiPnaHwD0dybpk84qYKI2FNE4EiYhC7+oVzZ38+gDOwQTNF5oOtmr qPFIaag/3Xa7tezPJlFEvigEEQNz303tPzXOBNrH+meIcQkyGRVdPnJQI A==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: A/0HnGa3ShOQbnjRmTLToA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: CPgUkTuHTHK/sJc/Ha7JQg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11900"; a="92009376" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.27,95,1787036400"; d="scan'208";a="92009376" Received: from fmviesa013.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.153]) by fmvoesa107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Sep 2026 06:19:33 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: lSi+uOXlQBmvop/lcYBxJg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: iZ23cC30SCuvEHrjQOc6AQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.27,95,1787036400"; d="scan'208";a="9244" Received: from black.igk.intel.com ([10.91.253.5]) by fmviesa013.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Sep 2026 06:19:30 -0700 Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 15:19:28 +0200 From: Raag Jadav To: "Nilawar, Badal" Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, anshuman.gupta@intel.com, rodrigo.vivi@intel.com, daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com, riana.tauro@intel.com, mallesh.koujalagi@intel.com, aravind.iddamsetty@intel.com, michal.wajdeczko@intel.com, himal.prasad.ghimiray@intel.com, arvind.yadav@intel.com, syed.abdul.muqthyar.ahmed@intel.com, nitin.r.gote@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/12] drm/xe/cper: Retrieve the error counter record for CPER reporting Message-ID: References: <20260906172604.2215987-14-badal.nilawar@intel.com> <20260906172604.2215987-16-badal.nilawar@intel.com> <5214c20f-ab36-4a8e-899e-351bca1d4026@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5214c20f-ab36-4a8e-899e-351bca1d4026@intel.com> 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: , Errors-To: intel-xe-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-xe" On Thu, Sep 10, 2026 at 06:29:03PM +0530, Nilawar, Badal wrote: > On 09-09-2026 11:42, Raag Jadav wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 08, 2026 at 12:16:27PM +0200, Raag Jadav wrote: > > > 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 > > > > --- > > > > 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? > > ras_counter_is_valid() is already part of get_counter() and !counter > > should be covered by IS_ERR_OR_NULL() in patch 1, which makes the entire > > condition redundant. > > get_counter is only validating ras response not caller provided counter. > > Check is needed for data[] payload from xe_log. In which case the caller is abusing xe_log and is expected to receive a get_counter() failure, so let's not hide bugs. Raag