Intel-XE Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Riana Tauro <riana.tauro@intel.com>
To: Simona Vetter <simona.vetter@ffwll.ch>
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>,
	"Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.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 20:16:32 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <dc62ee41-4b46-4a98-a200-055400108b5a@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aG5xglf8BeGzleWM@phenom.ffwll.local>

Hi Sima

On 7/9/2025 7:11 PM, 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?

example and documentation for vendor specific recovery are part of the 
same series.
patchwork link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/149756/

fwupd tool will be using this. This was the initial PR raised.
It is yet to be updated to use 'vendor-specific'

PR: https://github.com/fwupd/fwupd/pull/8922

> 
> 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.

It started as a specific macro and string but based on review comments 
it was changed to generic macro.

Thanks
Riana

> 
> 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
>>
> 



  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-07-09 14:46 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
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 [this message]
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=dc62ee41-4b46-4a98-a200-055400108b5a@intel.com \
    --to=riana.tauro@intel.com \
    --cc=airlied@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrealmeid@igalia.com \
    --cc=anshuman.gupta@intel.com \
    --cc=aravind.iddamsetty@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=christian.koenig@amd.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=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