Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] drm/xe: Expose retired VRAM pages via drm-ras

[Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>]

On Fri, Oct 16, 2026 at 03:49:13PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed,  7 Oct 2026 13:33:53 +0530 Aravind Iddamsetty wrote:
> > +  -
> > +    name: retired-resource-attrs
> > +    attributes:
> > +      -
> > +        name: node-id
> > +        type: u32
> > +        doc: Node ID targeted by this retired resource operation.
> > +      -
> > +        name: vram-page
> > +        type: nest
> > +        nested-attributes: vram-page-attrs
> 
> why wrap attrs in a nest? Are you planning to add other resource types
> (than a page)? It's a common anti-pattern in Netlink to over-wrap stuff.

we should indeed remove the wrap and have only the page info.

> 
> > +        doc: >-
> > +             Type-specific payload. The resource type is identified by the
> > +             node (its node-name); each node reports a single resource type.
> > +  -
> > +    name: vram-page-attrs
> > +    attributes:
> > +      -
> > +        name: address
> > +        type: u64
> > +        doc: Device address of the retired VRAM page (e.g. DPA).
> > +      -
> > +        name: size
> > +        type: u64
> 
> prefer uint
> 
> > +        doc: Size of the retired VRAM page in bytes.
> > +      -
> > +        name: max-pages
> > +        type: u32
> > +        doc: >-
> > +             Maximum VRAM pages that can be retired. Present only in the
> > +             leading summary entry of the dump (no address/size/status).
> > +      -
> > +        name: status
> > +        type: u32
> > +        doc: Retirement status of the retired VRAM page.
> > +        enum: retired-resource-status
> > +      -
> > +        name: pad
> > +        type: pad
> 
> And then you won't need pad

I noticed this in the review prompts, but I have some reservations here.
We know for sure our value is always u64 because it is our hw definition.
I don't see a good reason why not use the exact size that matches our hw.