Re: [PATCH v5 06/12] drm/xe/reg_sr: Report save-restore errors using structured xe_log API

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] drm/xe: missed replacement of xe_gt_err() in xe_reg_sr_add() error path
--

commit 124cf83eac965648c51da3c76c991dd6be76e259
Author: Dnyaneshwar Bhadane <dnyaneshwar.bhadane@intel.com>

drm/xe/reg_sr: Report save-restore errors using structured xe_log API

Replace xe_gt_notice() and xe_gt_err() calls with xe_log_info() and
xe_log_err() using the RTP and REGS component tags for register
save-restore operations.

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_reg_sr.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_reg_sr.c
> index e328f50725572..eab84a528d122 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_reg_sr.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_reg_sr.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -219,7 +220,7 @@ void xe_reg_sr_apply_mmio(struct xe_reg_sr *sr, struct xe_gt *gt)
>  
>  	CLASS(xe_force_wake, fw_ref)(gt_to_fw(gt), XE_FORCEWAKE_ALL);
>  	if (!xe_force_wake_ref_has_domain(fw_ref.domains, XE_FORCEWAKE_ALL)) {
> -		xe_gt_err(gt, "Failed to apply, err=-ETIMEDOUT\n");
> +		xe_log_err(gt, REGS, -ETIMEDOUT, "Failed to apply\n");
>  		return;
>  	}

[Severity: Medium]
Was the xe_gt_err() call in the failure path of xe_reg_sr_add() missed
during this refactoring?

drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_reg_sr.c:xe_reg_sr_add() {
	...
fail:
	xe_gt_err(gt,
		  "discarding save-restore reg %04lx (clear: %08x, set: %08x, masked: %s, mcr: %s): ret=%d\n",
		  idx, e->clr_bits, e->set_bits,
		  str_yes_no(e->reg.masked),
		  str_yes_no(e->reg.mcr),
		  ret);
	reg_sr_inc_error(sr);

	return ret;
}

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261007211417.2093611-1-dnyaneshwar.bhadane@intel.com?part=6