[AMD Official Use Only - General]
Comments inline
-----Original Message-----
From: amd-gfx <amd-gfx-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Alex Deucher
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2024 10:01 AM
To: amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Deucher, Alexander <Alexander.Deucher@xxxxxxx>
Subject: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu/mes11: print MES opcodes rather than numbers
Makes it easier to review the logs when there are MES errors.
Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v11_0.c | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v11_0.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v11_0.c
index 072c478665ade..73a4bb0f5ba0f 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v11_0.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/mes_v11_0.c
@@ -100,19 +100,51 @@ static const struct amdgpu_ring_funcs mes_v11_0_ring_funcs = {
.insert_nop = amdgpu_ring_insert_nop,
};
+static const char *mes_v11_0_opcodes[] = {
+ "MES_SCH_API_SET_HW_RSRC",
+ "MES_SCH_API_SET_SCHEDULING_CONFIG",
+ "MES_SCH_API_ADD_QUEUE"
+ "MES_SCH_API_REMOVE_QUEUE"
+ "MES_SCH_API_PERFORM_YIELD"
+ "MES_SCH_API_SET_GANG_PRIORITY_LEVEL"
+ "MES_SCH_API_SUSPEND"
+ "MES_SCH_API_RESUME"
+ "MES_SCH_API_RESET"
+ "MES_SCH_API_SET_LOG_BUFFER"
+ "MES_SCH_API_CHANGE_GANG_PRORITY"
+ "MES_SCH_API_QUERY_SCHEDULER_STATUS"
+ "MES_SCH_API_PROGRAM_GDS"
+ "MES_SCH_API_SET_DEBUG_VMID"
+ "MES_SCH_API_MISC"
+ "MES_SCH_API_UPDATE_ROOT_PAGE_TABLE"
+ "MES_SCH_API_AMD_LOG"
+};
+
+static const char *mes_v11_0_misc_opcodes[] = {
+ "MESAPI_MISC__WRITE_REG",
+ "MESAPI_MISC__INV_GART",
+ "MESAPI_MISC__QUERY_STATUS",
+ "MESAPI_MISC__READ_REG",
+ "MESAPI_MISC__WAIT_REG_MEM",
+ "MESAPI_MISC__SET_SHADER_DEBUGGER",
+};
+
static int mes_v11_0_submit_pkt_and_poll_completion(struct amdgpu_mes *mes,
void *pkt, int size,
int api_status_off)
{
int ndw = size / 4;
signed long r;
- union MESAPI__ADD_QUEUE *x_pkt = pkt;
+ union MESAPI__MISC *x_pkt = pkt;
struct MES_API_STATUS *api_status;
struct amdgpu_device *adev = mes->adev;
struct amdgpu_ring *ring = &mes->ring;
unsigned long flags;
signed long timeout = adev->usec_timeout;
+ if (x_pkt->header.opcode >= MES_SCH_API_MAX)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
if (amdgpu_emu_mode) {
timeout *= 100;
} else if (amdgpu_sriov_vf(adev)) {
@@ -135,13 +167,38 @@ static int mes_v11_0_submit_pkt_and_poll_completion(struct amdgpu_mes *mes,
amdgpu_ring_commit(ring);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&mes->ring_lock, fl
- DRM_DEBUG("MES msg=%d was emitted\n", x_pkt->header.opcode);
+ if (x_pkt->header.opcode == MES_SCH_API_MISC) {
+ if (x_pkt->opcode <= ARRAY_SIZE(mes_v11_0_misc_opcodes))
+ dev_err(adev->dev, "MES msg=%s (%s) was emitted\n",
[shaoyunl] Shouldn't we use DRM_DEBUG for valid condition ?
Regards
Shaoyun.liu
+ mes_v11_0_opcodes[x_pkt->header.opcode],
+ mes_v11_0_misc_opcodes[x_pkt->opcode]);
+ else
+ dev_err(adev->dev, "MES msg=%s (%d) was emitted\n",
+ mes_v11_0_opcodes[x_pkt->header.opcode],
+ x_pkt->opcode);
+ } else if (x_pkt->header.opcode < ARRAY_SIZE(mes_v11_0_opcodes))
+ dev_err(adev->dev, "MES msg=%s was emitted\n",
+ mes_v11_0_opcodes[x_pkt->header.opcode]);
+ else
+ dev_err(adev->dev, "MES msg=%d was emitted\n", x_pkt->header.opcode);
r = amdgpu_fence_wait_polling(ring, ring->fence_drv.sync_seq,
timeout);
if (r < 1) {
- DRM_ERROR("MES failed to response msg=%d\n",
- x_pkt->header.opcode);
+ if (x_pkt->header.opcode == MES_SCH_API_MISC) {
+ if (x_pkt->opcode <= ARRAY_SIZE(mes_v11_0_misc_opcodes))
+ dev_err(adev->dev, "MES failed to response msg=%s (%s)\n",
+ mes_v11_0_opcodes[x_pkt->header.opcode],
+ mes_v11_0_misc_opcodes[x_pkt->opcode]);
+ else
+ dev_err(adev->dev, "MES failed to response msg=%s (%d)\n",
+ mes_v11_0_opcodes[x_pkt->header.opcode], x_pkt->opcode);
+ } else if (x_pkt->header.opcode < ARRAY_SIZE(mes_v11_0_opcodes))
+ dev_err(adev->dev, "MES failed to response msg=%s\n",
+ mes_v11_0_opcodes[x_pkt->header.opcode]);
+ else
+ dev_err(adev->dev, "MES failed to response msg=%d\n",
+ x_pkt->header.opcode);
while (halt_if_hws_hang)
schedule();
--
2.44.0
