From: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
To: Simona Vetter <simona.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
Riana Tauro <riana.tauro@intel.com>
Cc: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, anshuman.gupta@intel.com,
rodrigo.vivi@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, "André Almeida" <andrealmeid@igalia.com>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/9] drm: Add a vendor-specific recovery method to device wedged uevent
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2025 16:09:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d42e17ef-30ce-4bf1-9948-7f08fd6f3bac@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aG5xglf8BeGzleWM@phenom.ffwll.local>
On 09.07.25 15:41, Simona Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 04:50:13PM +0530, Riana Tauro wrote:
>> Certain errors can cause the device to be wedged and may
>> require a vendor specific recovery method to restore normal
>> operation.
>>
>> Add a recovery method 'WEDGED=vendor-specific' for such errors. Vendors
>> must provide additional recovery documentation if this method
>> is used.
>>
>> v2: fix documentation (Raag)
>>
>> Cc: André Almeida <andrealmeid@igalia.com>
>> Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>
>> Cc: David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>
>> Cc: <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>
>> Suggested-by: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Riana Tauro <riana.tauro@intel.com>
>
> I'm not really understanding what this is useful for, maybe concrete
> example in the form of driver code that uses this, and some tool or
> documentation steps that should be taken for recovery?
The recovery method for this particular case is to flash in a new firmware.
> The issues I'm seeing here is that eventually we'll get different
> vendor-specific recovery steps, and maybe even on the same device, and
> that leads us to an enumeration issue. Since it's just a string and an
> enum I think it'd be better to just allocate a new one every time there's
> a new strange recovery method instead of this opaque approach.
That is exactly the opposite of what we discussed so far.
The original idea was to add a firmware-flush recovery method which looked a bit wage since it didn't give any information on what to do exactly.
That's why I suggested to add a more generic vendor-specific event with refers to the documentation and system log to see what actually needs to be done.
Otherwise we would end up with events like firmware-flash, update FW image A, update FW image B, FW version mismatch etc....
Regards,
Christian.
>
> Cheers, Sima
>
>> ---
>> Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst | 9 +++++----
>> drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c | 2 ++
>> include/drm/drm_device.h | 4 ++++
>> 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst b/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst
>> index 263e5a97c080..c33070bdb347 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst
>> @@ -421,10 +421,10 @@ Recovery
>> Current implementation defines three recovery methods, out of which, drivers
>> can use any one, multiple or none. Method(s) of choice will be sent in the
>> uevent environment as ``WEDGED=<method1>[,..,<methodN>]`` in order of less to
>> -more side-effects. If driver is unsure about recovery or method is unknown
>> -(like soft/hard system reboot, firmware flashing, physical device replacement
>> -or any other procedure which can't be attempted on the fly), ``WEDGED=unknown``
>> -will be sent instead.
>> +more side-effects. If recovery method is specific to vendor
>> +``WEDGED=vendor-specific`` will be sent and userspace should refer to vendor
>> +specific documentation for further recovery steps. If driver is unsure about
>> +recovery or method is unknown, ``WEDGED=unknown`` will be sent instead
>>
>> Userspace consumers can parse this event and attempt recovery as per the
>> following expectations.
>> @@ -435,6 +435,7 @@ following expectations.
>> none optional telemetry collection
>> rebind unbind + bind driver
>> bus-reset unbind + bus reset/re-enumeration + bind
>> + vendor-specific vendor specific recovery method
>> unknown consumer policy
>> =============== ========================================
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c
>> index cdd591b11488..0ac723a46a91 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_drv.c
>> @@ -532,6 +532,8 @@ static const char *drm_get_wedge_recovery(unsigned int opt)
>> return "rebind";
>> case DRM_WEDGE_RECOVERY_BUS_RESET:
>> return "bus-reset";
>> + case DRM_WEDGE_RECOVERY_VENDOR:
>> + return "vendor-specific";
>> default:
>> return NULL;
>> }
>> diff --git a/include/drm/drm_device.h b/include/drm/drm_device.h
>> index 08b3b2467c4c..08a087f149ff 100644
>> --- a/include/drm/drm_device.h
>> +++ b/include/drm/drm_device.h
>> @@ -26,10 +26,14 @@ struct pci_controller;
>> * Recovery methods for wedged device in order of less to more side-effects.
>> * To be used with drm_dev_wedged_event() as recovery @method. Callers can
>> * use any one, multiple (or'd) or none depending on their needs.
>> + *
>> + * Refer to "Device Wedging" chapter in Documentation/gpu/drm-uapi.rst for more
>> + * details.
>> */
>> #define DRM_WEDGE_RECOVERY_NONE BIT(0) /* optional telemetry collection */
>> #define DRM_WEDGE_RECOVERY_REBIND BIT(1) /* unbind + bind driver */
>> #define DRM_WEDGE_RECOVERY_BUS_RESET BIT(2) /* unbind + reset bus device + bind */
>> +#define DRM_WEDGE_RECOVERY_VENDOR BIT(3) /* vendor specific recovery method */
>>
>> /**
>> * struct drm_wedge_task_info - information about the guilty task of a wedge dev
>> --
>> 2.47.1
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-09 14:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-09 11:20 [PATCH v4 0/9] Handle Firmware reported Hardware Errors Riana Tauro
2025-07-09 11:20 ` [PATCH v4 1/9] drm: Add a vendor-specific recovery method to device wedged uevent Riana Tauro
2025-07-09 13:41 ` Simona Vetter
2025-07-09 14:09 ` Christian König [this message]
2025-07-09 14:18 ` Raag Jadav
2025-07-09 16:52 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2025-07-10 9:01 ` Simona Vetter
2025-07-10 9:37 ` Christian König
2025-07-10 10:24 ` Raag Jadav
2025-07-10 19:00 ` Rodrigo Vivi
2025-07-10 21:46 ` Raag Jadav
2025-07-11 5:17 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-11 6:08 ` Raag Jadav
2025-07-11 8:56 ` Simona Vetter
2025-07-11 8:59 ` Simona Vetter
2025-07-14 5:27 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-14 12:33 ` Simona Vetter
2025-07-09 14:46 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-09 11:20 ` [PATCH v4 2/9] drm/xe: Set GT as wedged before sending " Riana Tauro
2025-07-09 17:26 ` Matthew Brost
2025-07-09 11:20 ` [PATCH v4 3/9] drm/xe: Add a helper function to set recovery method Riana Tauro
2025-07-09 11:20 ` [PATCH v4 4/9] drm/xe/xe_survivability: Refactor survivability mode Riana Tauro
2025-07-09 11:20 ` [PATCH v4 5/9] drm/xe/xe_survivability: Add support for Runtime " Riana Tauro
2025-07-09 23:44 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-07-10 5:59 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-10 17:12 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-07-11 5:23 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-09 11:20 ` [PATCH v4 6/9] drm/xe/doc: Document device wedged and runtime survivability Riana Tauro
2025-07-11 5:39 ` Raag Jadav
2025-07-11 6:09 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-12 5:45 ` Raag Jadav
2025-07-14 9:04 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-09 11:20 ` [PATCH v4 7/9] drm/xe: Add support to handle hardware errors Riana Tauro
2025-07-10 21:09 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-07-11 5:35 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-11 17:34 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-07-09 11:20 ` [PATCH v4 8/9] drm/xe/xe_hw_error: Handle CSC Firmware reported Hardware errors Riana Tauro
2025-07-11 0:36 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-07-11 5:46 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-11 17:38 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-07-09 11:20 ` [PATCH v4 9/9] drm/xe/xe_hw_error: Add fault injection to trigger csc error handler Riana Tauro
2025-07-11 17:41 ` Umesh Nerlige Ramappa
2025-07-14 7:07 ` Riana Tauro
2025-07-09 12:28 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for Handle Firmware reported Hardware Errors (rev4) Patchwork
2025-07-09 12:30 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-07-09 12:44 ` ✗ CI.checksparse: warning " Patchwork
2025-07-09 13:06 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: success " Patchwork
2025-07-09 15:02 ` ✗ 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=d42e17ef-30ce-4bf1-9948-7f08fd6f3bac@amd.com \
--to=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=andrealmeid@igalia.com \
--cc=anshuman.gupta@intel.com \
--cc=aravind.iddamsetty@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--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=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=simona.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--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