On 16/06/15 10:40, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 07:36:24PM +0100, Dave Gordon wrote: >> From: Alex Dai <yu.dai@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> The new node provides access to the status of the common uC loader >> code and the GuC-specific loader; also the scratch registers used >> for communicatio between the i915 driver and the GuC firmware. >> >> Issue: VIZ-4884 >> Signed-off-by: Alex Dai <yu.dai@xxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Dave Gordon <david.s.gordon@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c >> index 47636f3..c52a745 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c >> @@ -2352,6 +2352,42 @@ static int i915_llc(struct seq_file *m, void *data) >> return 0; >> } >> >> +static void i915_uc_load_status_info(struct seq_file *m, struct intel_uc_fw *uc_fw) >> +{ >> + seq_printf(m, "%s firmware status:\n\tpath: <%s>\n\tfetch: %d\n\tload: %d\n", >> + uc_fw->uc_name, >> + uc_fw->uc_fw_path, >> + uc_fw->uc_fw_fetch_status, >> + uc_fw->uc_fw_load_status); > > If you made this one seq_printf() per line visualing the resulting > format would have been easier - and easier to modify. Done. > Don't use <%s>, that's just visual noise to make cutting and pasting > harder. My terminal doesn't include <> in word selections (but DOES include "/" and ".") so selecting a pathname just works :) But I've removed the <angle.brackets> anyway. > If you can decode numeric status values, do so. Done. I've added a _repr function for decoding the enum and used it everywhere. >> +} >> + >> +static int i915_guc_load_status_info(struct seq_file *m, void *data) >> +{ >> + struct drm_info_node *node = m->private; >> + struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv = node->minor->dev->dev_private; >> + u32 tmp, i; >> + >> + if (!HAS_GUC_UCODE(dev_priv->dev)) > > Here and elsewhere it should be return -ENODEV; There's only one other use of HAS_GUC_UCODE (in intel_guc_ucode_init()) and that one doesn't and mustn't trigger an error if false. I don't see why it should be an *error* here either; the caller hasn't done anything wrong, and there's no h/w or s/w failure. An empty result (EOF) is a nice way of saying that there's nothing to say, without making the user think something broke. In fact it may be perfectly meaningful to continue rather than returning; consider the case of a future GuC that comes with firmware preloaded, so HAS_GUC() is true but HAS_GUC_UCODE() is FALSE. We could still read and decode the GUC_STATUS even though we haven't loaded any firmware. >> + return 0; >> + >> + i915_uc_load_status_info(m, &dev_priv->guc.guc_fw); >> + >> + tmp = I915_READ(GUC_STATUS); >> + >> + seq_printf(m, "\nGuC status 0x%08x:\n", tmp); >> + seq_printf(m, "\tBootrom status = 0x%x\n", >> + (tmp & GS_BOOTROM_MASK) >> GS_BOOTROM_SHIFT); >> + seq_printf(m, "\tuKernel status = 0x%x\n", >> + (tmp & GS_UKERNEL_MASK) >> GS_UKERNEL_SHIFT); >> + seq_printf(m, "\tMIA Core status = 0x%x\n", >> + (tmp & GS_MIA_MASK) >> GS_MIA_SHIFT); >> + seq_puts(m, "\nScratch registers value:\n"); >> + for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) >> + seq_printf(m, "\t%2d: \t0x%x\n", i, I915_READ(SOFT_SCRATCH(i))); > > I have a feeling these probably don't want to be upstreamed. > -Chris It's just a register dump; nothing secret there. You could read them with IGT's register dumper anyway. .Dave. _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx