Quoting Michal Wajdeczko (2019-06-17 15:38:53) > On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 12:09:17 +0200, Chris Wilson > <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > If the user is clearing the log buffer too slowly, we overflow. As this > > is an expected condition, and the driver tries to handle it, reduce the > > error message down to a notice. > > > > Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110817 > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_log.c | 4 +++- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_log.c > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_log.c > > index bf1446629703..e3b83ecb90b5 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_log.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_log.c > > @@ -208,7 +208,9 @@ static bool guc_check_log_buf_overflow(struct > > intel_guc_log *log, > > /* buffer_full_cnt is a 4 bit counter */ > > log->stats[type].sampled_overflow += 16; > > } > > - DRM_ERROR_RATELIMITED("GuC log buffer overflow\n"); > > + > > + dev_notice_ratelimited(guc_to_i915(log_to_guc(log))->drm.dev, > > + "GuC log buffer overflow\n"); > > While this change alone is not harmful, I'm afraid that there might > be another reason why we see this message : once buffer_full_cnt is > turned on by the fw and then we reset the Guc, this field may have > stale value as it is not cleared by us/uc and we may wrongly assume > that there was an overflow. So yay/nay on silencing the test output so I can blissfully ignore it in bugzilla? -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
