On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 05:31:28PM -0800, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote:
> From: John Harrison <john.c.harri...@intel.com>
>
> Don't silently drop reset notifications from the GuC. It might not be
> safe to do an error capture but we still want some kind of report that
> the reset happened.
>
> Signed-off-by: John Harrison <john.c.harri...@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> 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 e7517206af82..0fbf24b8d5e1 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
> @@ -3979,6 +3979,11 @@ static void guc_handle_context_reset(struct intel_guc
> *guc,
> !context_blocked(ce))) {
> capture_error_state(guc, ce);
> guc_context_replay(ce);
> + } else {
> + drm_err(&guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm,
> + "Invalid GuC engine reset notificaion for 0x%04X on %s:
> banned = %d, blocked = %d",
> + ce->guc_id.id, ce->engine->name,
> intel_context_is_banned(ce),
> + context_blocked(ce));
As discussed off the list, I'll a take an AR to see if we can not
supress the capture here. But until that gets resolved:
Reviewed-by: Matthew Brost <matthew.br...@intel.com>
> }
> }
>
> --
> 2.25.1
>
