[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 07/55] drm/i915: Avoid using intel_engine_cs *ring for GPU error capture

[Joonas Lahtinen]

On ti, 2016-07-26 at 09:19 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 07:59:29AM +0300, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> > 
> > On ma, 2016-07-25 at 18:31 +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > Inside the error capture itself, we refer to not only the hardware
> > > engine, its ringbuffer but also the capture state. Finding clear names
> > > for each whilst avoiding mixing ring/intel_engine_cs is tricky. As a
> > > compromise we keep using ering for the error capture.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > > Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1469432687-22756-8-git-send-email-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h       |   6 +-
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gpu_error.c | 255 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
> > >  2 files changed, 134 insertions(+), 127 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > @@ -240,69 +240,71 @@ static const char *hangcheck_action_to_str(enum intel_ring_hangcheck_action a)
> > >  }
> > >  
> > >  static void i915_ring_error_state(struct drm_i915_error_state_buf *m,
> > > -				  struct drm_device *dev,
> > > -				  struct drm_i915_error_state *error,
> > > -				  int ring_idx)
> > > +				    struct drm_device *dev,
> > > +				    struct drm_i915_error_state *error,
> > > +				    int engine_idx)
> > >  {
> > > -	struct drm_i915_error_ring *ring = &error->ring[ring_idx];
> > > +	struct drm_i915_error_engine *ering = &error->engine[engine_idx];
> > >  
> > I'd be inclined keeping the struct and variable names close, so rather
> > eengine. Even though the error state is a mashup. We fill the ring
> > state to the engine error state. Function could be
> > i915_engine_error_ring_state() or so, to "reduce" confusion?
> i915_error_print_engine()
> 

Fine.

> (We may eventually get to the point where the capture/error functions
> are clearly and distinctly labelled!)
> 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > @@ -414,7 +416,7 @@ int i915_error_state_to_str(struct drm_i915_error_state_buf *m,
> > >  	if (IS_GEN7(dev))
> > >  		err_printf(m, "ERR_INT: 0x%08x\n", error->err_int);
> > >  
> > > -	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(error->ring); i++)
> > > +	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(error->engine); i++)
> > >  		i915_ring_error_state(m, dev, error, i);
> > >  
> > This captures the engine related ring state, I think it's even worth a
> > comment when there is engine vs. error disparity.
> This becomes
> 
> 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(error->engine); i++)
> 		i915_error_print_engine(m, &error->engine[i]);
> 
> > 
> > And how about the messages? Should we update them more agressively
> > where necessary.
> Ignoring the tautology in engine->name, in the actual error print the
> only times we explicitly refer to ring we do mean the ring.

Ack, Joonas

> -Chris
> 
-- 
Joonas Lahtinen
Open Source Technology Center
Intel Corporation