[Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/i915/guc/rc: Use i915_probe_error instead of drm_error

[Teres Alexis, Alan Previn]

Nit: not sure why we use ERR_PTR for int when calling func was also returning an int.
Anyway, that was how the original code was, so:

Reviewed-by: Alan Previn <alan.previn.teres.alexis at intel.com>


On Thu, 2022-05-05 at 22:41 -0700, Vinay Belgaumkar wrote:
> To avoid false positives in error injection cases.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vinay Belgaumkar <vinay.belgaumkar at intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_rc.c | 5 ++---
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_rc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_rc.c
> index e00661fb0853..8f8dd05835c5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_rc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_rc.c
> @@ -49,7 +49,6 @@ static int guc_action_control_gucrc(struct intel_guc *guc, bool enable)
>  static int __guc_rc_control(struct intel_guc *guc, bool enable)
>  {
>  	struct intel_gt *gt = guc_to_gt(guc);
> -	struct drm_device *drm = &guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm;
>  	int ret;
>  
>  	if (!intel_uc_uses_guc_rc(&gt->uc))
> @@ -60,8 +59,8 @@ static int __guc_rc_control(struct intel_guc *guc, bool enable)
>  
>  	ret = guc_action_control_gucrc(guc, enable);
>  	if (ret) {
> -		drm_err(drm, "Failed to %s GuC RC (%pe)\n",
> -			str_enable_disable(enable), ERR_PTR(ret));
> +		i915_probe_error(guc_to_gt(guc)->i915, "Failed to %s GuC RC (%pe)\n",
> +				 str_enable_disable(enable), ERR_PTR(ret));
>  		return ret;
>  	}
>  
> -- 
> 2.35.1
>