From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Raag Jadav" <raag.jadav@intel.com>, intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 9/9] drm/xe/ras: Move xe_ras_process_errors() to xe_ras
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2026 07:52:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-173977@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261016072623.457392-10-raag.jadav@intel.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] drm/xe: probe fails on boot-time RAS wedge instead of entering wedged state
- [High] xe: xe_gt_init() fails on early wedging aborting probe
- [Medium] drm/xe/ras: uevent lost when wedged before device_add()
--
commit e35d015152f1c4af5404ff382d3fce57a98e3c04
Author: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@intel.com>
drm/xe/ras: Move xe_ras_process_errors() to xe_ras
This commit moves xe_ras_process_errors() back to xe_ras_init() during the
early probe sequence. This reverts a previous change to prevent PM reference
leaks in case of early wedging.
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ras.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ras.c
> index 0072bb4cc5dfe..db3cbc186a514 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ras.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_ras.c
> @@ -1212,6 +1212,13 @@ int xe_ras_init(struct xe_device *xe)
> get_offline_list(xe);
> get_offline_queue(xe);
>
> + /*
> + * During probe, process and log any errors detected by firmware while the driver was not
> + * loaded. Critical errors such as Punit and CSC are reported through Pcode init failure,
> + * causing the driver to enter survivability mode.
> + */
> + xe_ras_process_errors(xe);
> +
[Severity: Medium]
Will this cause the wedge uevent to be lost?
Because xe_ras_init() executes early in the probe sequence, before
drm_dev_register() is called, declaring the device as wedged here will
schedule the wedge_work asynchronously. When the worker runs, it calls
drm_dev_wedged_event(), emitting a KOBJ_CHANGE uevent on the DRM kobject.
Since device_add() has not yet created the sysfs directory for the DRM
device, will userspace daemons silently drop this uevent?
[Severity: High]
Does wedging the device this early cause the driver probe to abort entirely
instead of entering survivability mode?
When xe_ras_process_errors() detects an error and wedges the device here, the
local GTs are skipped in xe_wedge_declare() because they are not yet
initialized. Later in xe_device_probe(), the driver will continue to GT
initialization:
xe_device_probe() {
...
for_each_gt(gt, xe, id) {
err = xe_gt_init(gt);
if (err)
return err;
}
...
}
During this GT initialization, the driver will attempt to communicate with the
GuC hardware. For example, the call chain into GuC CT communication checks the
global wedged flag:
xe_guc_ct_send() / __guc_ct_send_locked() {
if (xe_wedged(ct_to_xe(ct))) {
ret = -ENOTRECOVERABLE;
goto out;
}
...
}
Since the device was globally marked as wedged by xe_ras_init(), this returns
an error that propagates up, causing xe_gt_init() and xe_device_probe() to
fail. Could this prevent the device from successfully binding and exposing
survivability mode to userspace?
> ret = devm_device_add_group(xe->drm.dev, &gpu_health_group);
> if (ret)
> xe_err(xe, "Failed to create GPU health sysfs, err=%d\n", ret);
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261016072623.457392-1-raag.jadav@intel.com?part=9
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-16 7:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-16 7:25 [PATCH v10 0/9] Introduce xe_wedge Raag Jadav
2026-10-16 7:25 ` [PATCH v10 1/9] drm/xe/gt: Use GT ordered workqueue for wedging Raag Jadav
2026-10-16 7:50 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-16 7:25 ` [PATCH v10 2/9] drm/xe: Drop xe_device_set_wedged_method() Raag Jadav
2026-10-16 7:25 ` [PATCH v10 3/9] drm/xe/hw_error: Guard csc_hw_error_work() with runtime PM Raag Jadav
2026-10-16 7:43 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-16 7:25 ` [PATCH v10 4/9] drm/xe: Move xe_device_wedged_fini() registration to xe_device_probe_early() Raag Jadav
2026-10-16 7:25 ` [PATCH v10 5/9] drm/xe: Make xe_device_declare_wedged() IRQ safe Raag Jadav
2026-10-16 7:26 ` [PATCH v10 6/9] drm/xe/pci_error: Flush GT wedge worker before bus reset Raag Jadav
2026-10-16 7:44 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-16 7:26 ` [PATCH v10 7/9] drm/xe/amc: Guard xe_amc_work() with runtime PM Raag Jadav
2026-10-16 7:36 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-16 7:26 ` [PATCH v10 8/9] drm/xe: Introduce xe_wedge Raag Jadav
2026-10-16 7:34 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-16 7:26 ` [PATCH v10 9/9] drm/xe/ras: Move xe_ras_process_errors() to xe_ras Raag Jadav
2026-10-16 7:52 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-10-16 8:05 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for Introduce xe_wedge (rev9) Patchwork
2026-10-16 8:06 ` ✗ CI.KUnit: 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=sashiko-outbox-173977@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=raag.jadav@intel.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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