[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 5/9] drm/i915/perf: Group engines into respective OA groups

[Umesh Nerlige Ramappa]

On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 12:55:59PM -0800, Umesh Nerlige Ramappa wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 08:10:29PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
>>On Thu, 16 Feb 2023, "Dixit, Ashutosh" <ashutosh.dixit at intel.com> wrote:
>>>On Thu, 16 Feb 2023 02:51:34 -0800, Jani Nikula wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +static int oa_init_gt(struct intel_gt *gt)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +	u32 num_groups = __num_perf_groups_per_gt(gt);
>>>>> +	struct intel_engine_cs *engine;
>>>>> +	struct i915_perf_group *g;
>>>>> +	intel_engine_mask_t tmp;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	g = kcalloc(num_groups, sizeof(*g), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>> +	if (drm_WARN_ON(&gt->i915->drm, !g))
>>>>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>>>>
>>>>No warnings or messages on -ENOMEM is standard policy.
>>>
>>>Hmm I think this is the only error for which this code is failing the
>>>probe. So if we are not going to fail the probe, we should at least allow a
>>>WARN_ON? Exception proves the rule?
>>
>>A whole lot of other things are going to go bonkers on -ENOMEM, and
>>getting that warn isn't going to help anyone...
>
>Should I just add a debug message here instead of warn_ON?

nvm, you already mentioned no warn/message on ENOMEM.

Regards,
Umesh
>
>>
>>Maybe we do need to fail probe on this after all, but it just seemed
>>pointless at the time it was introduced a few patches earlier.
>
>Sorry about that, I will fix the order of patches.
>
>Umesh
>>
>>BR,
>>Jani.
>>
>>-- 
>>Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center