On 2/24/2017 8:15 AM, Michel Thierry wrote:
On 2/24/2017 2:40 AM, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 03:11:37PM -0800, Michel Thierry wrote:
There was no way to check if the platform is running the latest
firmware.
Can we also add similar patch for the HuC ?
Please don't tell me the HuC can hang the gpu too.
Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Arkadiusz Hiler <arkadiusz.hiler@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Michel Thierry <michel.thierry@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gpu_error.c | 10 ++++++++++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gpu_error.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gpu_error.c
index 2b1d15668192..e022187916ee 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gpu_error.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gpu_error.c
@@ -632,6 +632,16 @@ int i915_error_state_to_str(struct
drm_i915_error_state_buf *m,
CSR_VERSION_MINOR(csr->version));
}
+ if (HAS_GUC_UCODE(dev_priv)) {
+ struct intel_uc_fw *guc_fw = &dev_priv->guc.fw;
I would preffer to use HAS_GUC and intel_guc* here.
+
+ err_printf(m, "GuC loaded: %s\n",
+ yesno(guc_fw->load_status ==
+ INTEL_UC_FIRMWARE_SUCCESS));
Hmm, as we do have more detailed load status, why limiting it to
yes/no only?
Will it help in the post-mortem debug?
My idea was, if the fw didn't load, we can take it completely out of the
picture.
-Michal
+ err_printf(m, "GuC fw version: %d.%d\n",
+ guc_fw->major_ver_found, guc_fw->minor_ver_found);
+ }
+
err_printf(m, "EIR: 0x%08x\n", error->eir);
err_printf(m, "IER: 0x%08x\n", error->ier);
for (i = 0; i < error->ngtier; i++)
--
2.11.0
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
