Re: [PATCH v9 3/7] drm/xe: Trigger queue cleanup if not in wedged mode 2

[Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>]

On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 12:33:54PM -0400, Dong, Zhanjun wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2026-03-10 6:50 p.m., Zhanjun Dong wrote:
> > The intent of wedging a device is to allow queues to continue running
> > only in wedged mode 2. In other modes, queues should initiate cleanup
> > and signal all remaining fences. Fix xe_guc_submit_wedge to correctly
> > clean up queues when wedge mode != 2.
> > 
> > Fixes: 7dbe8af13c18 ("drm/xe: Wedge the entire device")
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@intel.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++-----------
> >   1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
> > index 8afd424b27fb..cb32053d57ec 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_submit.c
> > @@ -1319,6 +1319,7 @@ static void disable_scheduling_deregister(struct xe_guc *guc,
> >    */
> >   void xe_guc_submit_wedge(struct xe_guc *guc)
> >   {
> > +	struct xe_device *xe = guc_to_xe(guc);
> >   	struct xe_gt *gt = guc_to_gt(guc);
> >   	struct xe_exec_queue *q;
> >   	unsigned long index;
> > @@ -1333,20 +1334,28 @@ void xe_guc_submit_wedge(struct xe_guc *guc)
> >   	if (!guc->submission_state.initialized)
> >   		return;
> > -	err = devm_add_action_or_reset(guc_to_xe(guc)->drm.dev,
> > -				       guc_submit_wedged_fini, guc);
> > -	if (err) {
> > -		xe_gt_err(gt, "Failed to register clean-up in wedged.mode=%s; "
> > -			  "Although device is wedged.\n",
> > -			  xe_wedged_mode_to_string(XE_WEDGED_MODE_UPON_ANY_HANG_NO_RESET));
> > -		return;
> > -	}
> > +	if (xe->wedged.mode == 2) {
> > +		err = devm_add_action_or_reset(guc_to_xe(guc)->drm.dev,
> > +					       guc_submit_wedged_fini, guc);
> > +		if (err) {
> > +			xe_gt_err(gt, "Failed to register clean-up on wedged.mode=2; "
> > +				  "Although device is wedged.\n");
> > +			return;
> > +		}
> > -	mutex_lock(&guc->submission_state.lock);
> > -	xa_for_each(&guc->submission_state.exec_queue_lookup, index, q)
> > -		if (xe_exec_queue_get_unless_zero(q))
> > -			set_exec_queue_wedged(q);
> > -	mutex_unlock(&guc->submission_state.lock);
> > +		mutex_lock(&guc->submission_state.lock);
> > +		xa_for_each(&guc->submission_state.exec_queue_lookup, index, q)
> > +			if (xe_exec_queue_get_unless_zero(q))
> > +				set_exec_queue_wedged(q);
> > +		mutex_unlock(&guc->submission_state.lock);
> > +	} else {
> > +		/* Forcefully kill any remaining exec queues, signal fences */
> Q: Shall we do VF bypass here?
> 

Same answer as last patch - no.

Matt

> Regards,
> Zhanjun Dong
> > +		guc_submit_reset_prepare(guc);
> > +		xe_guc_submit_stop(guc);
> > +		xe_guc_softreset(guc);
> > +		xe_uc_fw_sanitize(&guc->fw);
> > +		xe_guc_submit_pause_abort(guc);
> > +	}
> >   }
> >   static bool guc_submit_hint_wedged(struct xe_guc *guc)
>