Am 12.08.19 um 21:05 schrieb Zhao, Yong:
The printing we did for GFX9 was not propogated to GFX10 somehow, so fix
it now.
Change-Id: Ic0b8381134340b83cd69c3fe186ac7a8a97b1bca
Signed-off-by: Yong Zhao <Yong.Zhao@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v10_0.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++----
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v9_0.c | 5 +++-
2 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v10_0.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v10_0.c
index 4e3ac1084a94..f23be98e9897 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v10_0.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v10_0.c
@@ -140,17 +140,40 @@ static int gmc_v10_0_process_interrupt(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
}
if (printk_ratelimit()) {
+ struct amdgpu_task_info task_info;
+
+ memset(&task_info, 0, sizeof(struct amdgpu_task_info));
+ amdgpu_vm_get_task_info(adev, entry->pasid, &task_info);
+
dev_err(adev->dev,
- "[%s] VMC page fault (src_id:%u ring:%u vmid:%u pasid:%u)\n",
+ "[%s] page fault (src_id:%u ring:%u vmid:%u pasid:%u, "
+ "for process:%s pid:%d thread:%s pid:%d)\n",
entry->vmid_src ? "mmhub" : "gfxhub",
entry->src_id, entry->ring_id, entry->vmid,
- entry->pasid);
- dev_err(adev->dev, " at page 0x%016llx from %d\n",
+ entry->pasid, task_info.process_name, task_info.tgid,
+ task_info.task_name, task_info.pid);
+ dev_err(adev->dev, " in page starting at address 0x%016llx from client %d\n",
addr, entry->client_id);
- if (!amdgpu_sriov_vf(adev))
+ if (!amdgpu_sriov_vf(adev)) {
dev_err(adev->dev,
- "VM_L2_PROTECTION_FAULT_STATUS:0x%08X\n",
+ "GCVM_L2_PROTECTION_FAULT_STATUS:0x%08X\n",
status);
+ dev_err(adev->dev, "\t MORE_FAULTS: 0x%lx\n",
+ REG_GET_FIELD(status,
+ GCVM_L2_PROTECTION_FAULT_STATUS, MORE_FAULTS));
+ dev_err(adev->dev, "\t WALKER_ERROR: 0x%lx\n",
+ REG_GET_FIELD(status,
+ GCVM_L2_PROTECTION_FAULT_STATUS, WALKER_ERROR));
+ dev_err(adev->dev, "\t PERMISSION_FAULTS: 0x%lx\n",
+ REG_GET_FIELD(status,
+ GCVM_L2_PROTECTION_FAULT_STATUS, PERMISSION_FAULTS));
+ dev_err(adev->dev, "\t MAPPING_ERROR: 0x%lx\n",
+ REG_GET_FIELD(status,
+ GCVM_L2_PROTECTION_FAULT_STATUS, MAPPING_ERROR));
+ dev_err(adev->dev, "\t RW: 0x%lx\n",
+ REG_GET_FIELD(status,
+ GCVM_L2_PROTECTION_FAULT_STATUS, RW));
+ }
}
return 0;
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v9_0.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v9_0.c
index 296e2d982578..34c4c2d08550 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v9_0.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gmc_v9_0.c
@@ -364,7 +364,7 @@ static int gmc_v9_0_process_interrupt(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
dev_err(adev->dev,
"[%s] %s page fault (src_id:%u ring:%u vmid:%u "
- "pasid:%u, for process %s pid %d thread %s pid %d)\n",
+ "pasid:%u, for process:%s pid:%d thread:%s pid:%d)\n",
I think the text actually looks better without the ":".
hub_name, retry_fault ? "retry" : "no-retry",
entry->src_id, entry->ring_id, entry->vmid,
entry->pasid, task_info.process_name, task_info.tgid,
@@ -387,6 +387,9 @@ static int gmc_v9_0_process_interrupt(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
dev_err(adev->dev, "\t MAPPING_ERROR: 0x%lx\n",
REG_GET_FIELD(status,
VM_L2_PROTECTION_FAULT_STATUS, MAPPING_ERROR));
+ dev_err(adev->dev, "\t RW: 0x%lx\n",
+ REG_GET_FIELD(status,
+ VM_L2_PROTECTION_FAULT_STATUS, RW));
That should probably be a separate patch since it is fixing gfx9.
Apart from that the patch looks good to me,
Christian.
}
}
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
