[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915: Downgrade scare message for unknwown HuC firmware

Chris Wilson chris at chris-wilson.co.uk
Tue Jan 8 12:52:01 UTC 2019


Quoting Michal Wajdeczko (2019-01-08 12:48:24)
> typo in title
> 
> On Tue, 08 Jan 2019 11:11:45 +0100, Chris Wilson  
> <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > If we haven't shipped and enabled firmware for a particular platform,
> > there is nothing the user can do about it. Don't scare the user with an
> > unactionable, unindentifiable warning!
> 
> Did you mean: unidentifiable ?

Unindentable!

> 
> >
> > <6> [310.769452] i915 0000:00:02.0: GuC: No firmware known for this  
> > platform!
> > <4> [310.769458] [drm] HuC: No firmware known for this platform!
> >
> > Unify both GuC/HuC messages to include the device for which we lack the
> > firmware, and provide the platform name as an aide-memoire.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris at chris-wilson.co.uk>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c | 4 +---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc_fw.c | 3 +--
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc_fw.c  | 8 ++++++++
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uc_fw.h  | 2 ++
> >  4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c  
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c
> > index 4b437e05e2cd..b8364bd8ccf8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_guc_fw.c
> > @@ -78,9 +78,7 @@ static void guc_fw_select(struct intel_uc_fw *guc_fw)
> >               guc_fw->major_ver_wanted = KBL_FW_MAJOR;
> >               guc_fw->minor_ver_wanted = KBL_FW_MINOR;
> >       } else {
> > -             dev_info(dev_priv->drm.dev,
> > -                      "%s: No firmware known for this platform!\n",
> > -                      intel_uc_fw_type_repr(guc_fw->type));
> > +             intel_uc_fw_unknown(dev_priv, guc_fw);
> 
> Maybe instead of adding extra function that have to be explicitly called,
> just move message to intel_uc_fw_fetch() where we already check for fw  
> path:

If that suits; I presumed there was something inherent with why it was
there :)
-Chris


More information about the Intel-gfx mailing list