On 23.11.2021 00:03, Alan Previn wrote:
> From: John Harrison <John.C.Harrison@xxxxxxxxx>
...
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> index 77fbcd8730ee..0bfc92b1b982 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> @@ -4003,6 +4003,24 @@ int intel_guc_context_reset_process_msg(struct intel_guc *guc,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +int intel_guc_error_capture_process_msg(struct intel_guc *guc,
> + const u32 *msg, u32 len)
> +{
> + int status;
likely it should be "u32" as few lines below you're using msg[0];
> +
> + if (unlikely(len != 1)) {
> + drm_dbg(&guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm, "Invalid length %u", len);
any error returned by the CTB message handler will trigger full dump of
unexpected message - do we really need this unlikely dbg message here ?
> + return -EPROTO;
> + }
> +
> + status = msg[0];
> + drm_info(&guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm, "Got error capture: status = %d", status);
IIRC all notification status are defined in GuC spec in hex, so maybe we
should also print it as %#x ?
-Michal
> +
> + /* Add extraction of error capture dump */
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static struct intel_engine_cs *
> guc_lookup_engine(struct intel_guc *guc, u8 guc_class, u8 instance)
> {
>
