On 06/01/2023 18:57, John Harrison wrote:
On 12/6/2022 03:06, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 05/12/2022 18:44, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
On 05.12.2022 14:16, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
On 02/12/2022 20:14, John Harrison wrote:
[snip]
Random meaningless (to me) message that is apparently a display thing:
drm_dbg_kms(&dev_priv->drm, "disabling %s\n", pll->info->name);
i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm:intel_disable_shared_dpll [i915]] disabling
PORT PLL B
Plan is to not touch outside gt/.
For some unexplicable reason that means it is almost impossible to see
the actual problems in most CI dmesg logs because they are swamped with
irrelevant display messages that cannot be filtered out. For example, I
recently manually grep'd out all the display spam from a bug report log.
The dmesg file went from 12MB to 700KB. That is a significant problem
that makes bug triage way harder than it needs to be.
I didn't get this part, how it would reduce the amount of spam by adding
new macros? Anyway, that's something to split out and discuss with
display folks.
Maybe as a way forward work could be split? If John wants to deal with
gt_xxx macros, avoid touching GuC (putting his original motivation
aside) and you want to convert the gt/uc folder? Assuming John you are
okay with "GuC:" and "CT:" prefixes.
Meaning just repost patch #1 only and expand to more intel_gt_* files?
Sure, if someone will actually reply to that patch with some kind of r-b
first so I know I'm not still wasting my time on a huge re-write that
will to be redone multiple times when someone objects to the use of a
colon or the lack of spaces, braces or whatever.
First patch looks good to me (ack in principle) apart that Michal found
one potential null pointer dereference if I understood it right. That
other comment about the ratelimited call is maybe okay to leave for
later, *if* it will be a single instance, otherwise needs a gt logger as
well. I can r-b once you re-send with the first issue fixed.
Regards,
Tvrtko
