On 2023-10-31 5:38 p.m., Teres Alexis, Alan Previn wrote:
On Fri, 2023-10-27 at 10:13 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023, Zhanjun Dong <zhanjun.dong@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
alan:snip
I'll note that nobody checks intel_pxp_init() return status, so this
silently skips PXP.
BR,
Jani.
alan:snip
+ if (intel_gt_is_wedged(gt))
+ return -ENODEV;
+
alan: wondering if we can add a drm_dbg in the caller of intel_pxp_init and
use a unique return value for the case of gt_is_wedged (for example: -ENXIO.).
As we know gt being wedged at startup basically means all gt usage is dead
and therefore we cant enable PXP (along with everything else that needs submission/
guc/ etc). With a drm-debug in the caller that prints that return value, it
helps us to differentiate between gt-is-wedged vs platform config doesnt support
PXP. However, this would mean new drm-debug 'noise' for platforms that i915 just
doesn't support PXP on at all which would be okay if dont use drm_warn or drm_err
and use 'softer' message like "PXP skipped with %d".
Please treat above comment as a "nit" - i.e. existing patch is good enough for me...
(after addressing Jani's request for more commit message info). ...alan
Thanks Alan.
I agree, add more drm-debug looks like add noise in case of
gt_is_wedged, existing code already output useful info.
If logs already let us know gt_wedged happens and we are not expect pxp
init running on gt wedged condition, then silently skip pxp_init looks
like match the expectation.
I will re-post with updated commit message later.
Regards,
Zhanjun
