On 10/14/2022 20:59, Alan Previn wrote:
If GuC is being used and we initialized GuC-error-capture,
we need to be warning if we don't provide an error-capture
register list in the firmware ADS, for valid GT engines.
A warning makes sense as this would impact debugability
without realizing why a reglist wasn't retrieved and reported
by GuC.
However, depending on the platform, we might have certain
engines that have a register list for engine instance error state
but not for engine class. Thus, add a check only to warn if the
register list was non existent vs an empty list (use the
empty lists to skip the warning).
Signed-off-by: Alan Previn <alan.previn.teres.ale...@intel.com>
---
.../gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_capture.c | 55 ++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_capture.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_capture.c
index 8f1165146013..290c1e1343dd 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_capture.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_capture.c
@@ -419,6 +419,44 @@ guc_capture_get_device_reglist(struct intel_guc *guc)
return default_lists;
}
+static const char *
+__stringify_type(u32 type)
+{
+ switch (type) {
+ case GUC_CAPTURE_LIST_TYPE_GLOBAL:
+ return "Global";
+ case GUC_CAPTURE_LIST_TYPE_ENGINE_CLASS:
+ return "Class";
+ case GUC_CAPTURE_LIST_TYPE_ENGINE_INSTANCE:
+ return "Instance";
+ default:
+ return "unknown";
+ }
+
+ return "";
As per Tvrtko's comment, this is dead code and unnecessary. A blank
'default:' that falls through to 'return "Unknown";' would be better.
+}
+
+static const char *
+__stringify_engclass(u32 class)
+{
+ switch (class) {
+ case GUC_RENDER_CLASS:
+ return "Render";
+ case GUC_VIDEO_CLASS:
+ return "Video";
+ case GUC_VIDEOENHANCE_CLASS:
+ return "VideoEnhance";
+ case GUC_BLITTER_CLASS:
+ return "Blitter";
+ case GUC_COMPUTE_CLASS:
+ return "Compute";
+ default:
+ return "unknown";
+ }
+
+ return "";
As above.
+}
+
static int
guc_capture_list_init(struct intel_guc *guc, u32 owner, u32 type, u32 classid,
struct guc_mmio_reg *ptr, u16 num_entries)
@@ -487,19 +525,32 @@ intel_guc_capture_getlistsize(struct intel_guc *guc, u32
owner, u32 type, u32 cl
size_t *size)
{
struct intel_guc_state_capture *gc = guc->capture;
+ struct drm_i915_private *i915 = guc_to_gt(guc)->i915;
struct __guc_capture_ads_cache *cache =
&gc->ads_cache[owner][type][classid];
int num_regs;
- if (!gc->reglists)
+ if (!gc->reglists) {
+ drm_warn(&i915->drm, "GuC-capture: No reglist on this
device\n");
return -ENODEV;
+ }
if (cache->is_valid) {
*size = cache->size;
return cache->status;
}
+ if (!guc_capture_get_one_list(gc->reglists, owner, type, classid)) {
+ if (owner == GUC_CAPTURE_LIST_INDEX_PF && type ==
GUC_CAPTURE_LIST_TYPE_GLOBAL)
+ drm_warn(&i915->drm, "GuC-capture: missing reglist
type-Global\n");
+ if (owner == GUC_CAPTURE_LIST_INDEX_PF)
+ drm_warn(&i915->drm, "GuC-capture: missing regiist
type(%d)-%s : "
+ "%s(%d)-Engine\n", type,
__stringify_type(type),
What Tvrtko is meaning here is to not split the string at all. You can
ignore a line length warning message if the only alternatives are either
to split the string or to obfuscate the code with unreadable/unnecessary
construction methods.
+ __stringify_engclass(classid), classid);
+ return -ENODATA;
+ }
+
num_regs = guc_cap_list_num_regs(gc, owner, type, classid);
- if (!num_regs)
+ if (!num_regs) /* intentional empty lists can exist depending on hw
config */
Not sure if this is proper formatting for a comment? I would either put
it on the line before or inside the if with the addition of braces.
John.
return -ENODATA;
*size = PAGE_ALIGN((sizeof(struct guc_debug_capture_list)) +
