On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 08:15:59PM +0530, Cavitt, Jonathan wrote:
> From: Jadav, Raag <raag.ja...@intel.com>
> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 11:09:28PM +0000, Jonathan Cavitt wrote:
> > > Add support for userspace to request a list of observed faults
> > > from a specified VM.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > v10:
> > > - Remove unnecessary switch case logic (Raag)
> >
> > This is usually "changes present in version" and not "comments received
> > in version" but I guess this must be one of those drm things.
>
> I'm fairly certain change logs are supposed to be written in the future tense.
> Or at the very least, I think I picked up the habit in college. Is this not
> correct?
I meant it belongs to v11.
> > > +static int xe_vm_get_property_helper(struct xe_vm *vm,
> > > + struct drm_xe_vm_get_property *args)
> > > +{
> > > + int size;
> > > +
> > > + switch (args->property) {
> > > + case DRM_XE_VM_GET_PROPERTY_FAULTS:
> > > + spin_lock(&vm->faults.lock);
> > > + size = size_mul(sizeof(struct xe_vm_fault), vm->faults.len);
> > > + spin_unlock(&vm->faults.lock);
> > > +
> > > + if (args->size)
> > > + /*
> > > + * Number of faults may increase between calls to
> > > + * xe_vm_get_property_ioctl, so just report the
> > > + * number of faults the user requests if it's less
> > > + * than or equal to the number of faults in the VM
> > > + * fault array.
> > > + */
> > > + return args->size <= size ? fill_faults(vm, args) :
> > > -EINVAL;
> >
> > You're comparing an int with u32 and I'm not sure how this plays out.
> > The usual practice is to use size_t (even in the struct)
>
> Size is a u32 in struct drm_xe_device_query.
And what about the local one?
Raag
