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 A418BEB64DA for ; Wed, 5 Jul 2023 15:39:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5237B10E177; Wed, 5 Jul 2023 15:39:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga05.intel.com (mga05.intel.com [192.55.52.43]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8176F10E397 for ; Wed, 5 Jul 2023 15:39:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1688571582; x=1720107582; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3GoQMZ+DNrf23Bcw3QOz7twgjS4c93oMmydDRQFtjBo=; b=eJkw6+HFgWidIn+QIHhsHbOuMdwDx/KWUF0WbX/7Tzzfgy4ME/XkRul9 0ysvSoSpe1UJ9jr5vOdxIb27KdCdMtHV6jgWSTAE57qtWvdHOPkep7NUc sZdj9+/gQxJxkj6/lPBtTEhASa85CK2Ewpa3GgmVskqUBOmUJRUY5nI1c NsRbrmXG/uguo7v+OJUpkgS3G21EFLu3RP7IVh75UAQgeAs7mArFr1RW0 /b6q0MVkHChdUbGzYAanjU/5copcaY4WeDvEUCh3RUru0ZACnGWHieLdu UEgiLppcF2ykLzaeTgqGH1jB/Fxa0Y7xvxqiAVEnwoG1tj9zJzms2UPAo Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10762"; a="449739328" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,183,1684825200"; d="scan'208";a="449739328" Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Jul 2023 08:39:24 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10762"; a="754403757" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,183,1684825200"; d="scan'208";a="754403757" Received: from nirmoyda-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.249.33.133]) ([10.249.33.133]) by orsmga001-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Jul 2023 08:39:22 -0700 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2023 17:39:20 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.12.0 Content-Language: en-US To: "Dixit, Ashutosh" , Tejas Upadhyay References: <20230705084403.3922130-1-tejas.upadhyay@intel.com> <87y1jucv1g.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> From: Nirmoy Das In-Reply-To: <87y1jucv1g.wl-ashutosh.dixit@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Intel-xe] [PATCH V2] drm/xe: make GT sysfs init return void 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: , Cc: Andi Shyti , intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, Nirmoy Das Errors-To: intel-xe-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-xe" Hi Ashutosh, On 7/5/2023 4:06 PM, Dixit, Ashutosh wrote: > On Wed, 05 Jul 2023 01:44:03 -0700, Tejas Upadhyay wrote: >> Currently return from xe_gt_sysfs_init() is ignored >> and also a failure in xe_gt_sysfs_init() isn't fatal >> so make it return void. > But why is the failure not fatal? I really don't understand the concept of > these non-fatal failures. Do we really want to say the device is up if > sysfs initialization has failed for some reason and people are unable to > see card freq's e.g.? This was done in i915 but do we really want to repeat > this for xe? IMO the simplest thing to do would be to fail the probe unless > ALL required/intended functionality is clearly up. I agree with the concern but the situation is different with a graphics driver. If we return error on probe, (if I am not wrong) a user will have no way to interact with the system other than ssh. We should ignore non-fatal error and let the driver load so a user can have something to work with(may be report a bug :) ) Regards, Nirmoy > > Instead of ignoring the return, fail the probe? > > Thanks. > -- > Ashutosh