From: "Tauro, Riana" <riana.tauro@intel.com>
To: Mallesh Koujalagi <mallesh.koujalagi@intel.com>,
<intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org>, <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
<matthew.brost@intel.com>, <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
Cc: <anshuman.gupta@intel.com>, <badal.nilawar@intel.com>,
<vinay.belgaumkar@intel.com>, <aravind.iddamsetty@intel.com>,
<karthik.poosa@intel.com>, <sk.anirban@intel.com>,
<raag.jadav@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 4/5] drm/xe: Use RAS logging to report survivability mode
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2026 14:11:58 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d944482a-10a0-4a0b-87da-866a60a8b067@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260630115503.407158-11-mallesh.koujalagi@intel.com>
On 30-06-2026 17:25, Mallesh Koujalagi wrote:
> Replace dev_err() calls with xe_ras_log_survivability() so
> survivability events are reported through the structured RAS logging
> path with a consistent format.
How about sysfs creation failure? Is that not required?
> Signed-off-by: Mallesh Koujalagi <mallesh.koujalagi@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c | 11 ++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c
> index 427afd144f3a..a58d46f67677 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c
> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
> #include "xe_mmio.h"
> #include "xe_nvm.h"
> #include "xe_pcode_api.h"
> +#include "xe_ras_log.h"
> #include "xe_vsec.h"
>
> /**
> @@ -307,7 +308,6 @@ static int create_survivability_sysfs(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>
> static int enable_boot_survivability_mode(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> {
> - struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> struct xe_device *xe = pdev_to_xe_device(pdev);
> struct xe_survivability *survivability = &xe->survivability;
> int ret = 0;
> @@ -333,12 +333,12 @@ static int enable_boot_survivability_mode(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> if (ret)
> goto err;
>
> - dev_err(dev, "In Survivability Mode\n");
> + xe_ras_log_survivability(xe, 0, "Boot Survivability Mode enabled\n");
>
> return 0;
>
> err:
> - dev_err(dev, "Failed to enable Survivability Mode\n");
> + xe_ras_log_survivability(xe, ret, "Failed to enable Boot Survivability Mode\n");
> survivability->mode = false;
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -413,11 +413,12 @@ void xe_survivability_mode_runtime_enable(struct xe_device *xe)
> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to create survivability sysfs\n");
>
> survivability->type = XE_SURVIVABILITY_TYPE_RUNTIME;
> - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Runtime Survivability mode enabled\n");
> + xe_ras_log_survivability(xe, -EIO,
> + "Runtime Survivability Mode enabled, firmware flash required.\n"
> + "Please refer to the userspace documentation for more details!\n");
Why do we need error code here and not in boot survivability?
Also what is the purpose of this error code?
Thanks
Riana
>
> xe_device_set_wedged_method(xe, DRM_WEDGE_RECOVERY_VENDOR);
> xe_device_declare_wedged(xe);
> - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Firmware flash required, Please refer to the userspace documentation for more details!\n");
> }
>
> /**
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-06 8:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-30 11:55 [RFC PATCH v4 0/5] drm/xe: Structured RAS error logging infrastructure Mallesh Koujalagi
2026-06-30 11:55 ` [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] drm/xe: Add SIG_IDs for RAS error logging Mallesh Koujalagi
2026-06-30 14:25 ` Raag Jadav
2026-07-06 10:43 ` Mallesh, Koujalagi
2026-07-06 13:59 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2026-06-30 11:55 ` [RFC PATCH v4 2/5] drm/xe: Add RAS logging helpers Mallesh Koujalagi
2026-07-03 11:15 ` Tauro, Riana
2026-07-03 13:01 ` Mallesh, Koujalagi
2026-07-06 8:35 ` Tauro, Riana
2026-07-06 10:53 ` Mallesh, Koujalagi
2026-06-30 11:55 ` [RFC PATCH v4 3/5] drm/xe: use xe_ras_log_wedged macro in xe_device_declare_wedged Mallesh Koujalagi
2026-07-06 8:36 ` Tauro, Riana
2026-07-06 23:57 ` Mallesh, Koujalagi
2026-07-06 14:32 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2026-06-30 11:55 ` [RFC PATCH v4 4/5] drm/xe: Use RAS logging to report survivability mode Mallesh Koujalagi
2026-07-06 8:41 ` Tauro, Riana [this message]
2026-06-30 11:55 ` [RFC PATCH v4 5/5] drm/xe: Replace critical drm_err log with xe_ras_log_probe Mallesh Koujalagi
2026-07-06 15:38 ` Michal Wajdeczko
2026-06-30 13:12 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for drm/xe: Structured RAS error logging infrastructure (rev4) Patchwork
2026-06-30 13:13 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2026-06-30 14:05 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2026-07-01 4:42 ` ✗ 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=d944482a-10a0-4a0b-87da-866a60a8b067@intel.com \
--to=riana.tauro@intel.com \
--cc=anshuman.gupta@intel.com \
--cc=aravind.iddamsetty@intel.com \
--cc=badal.nilawar@intel.com \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=karthik.poosa@intel.com \
--cc=mallesh.koujalagi@intel.com \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=raag.jadav@intel.com \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=sk.anirban@intel.com \
--cc=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vinay.belgaumkar@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