[PATCH 5/7] drm/xe: Cleanup unwind of gt initialization

[Raag Jadav]

On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 02:31:38PM -0800, Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> Move the xe_gt_remove() to be handled by xe_gt.c itself so the caller,
> xe_device_probe() doesn't have to unwind the gt loop. It's also more in
> line with the xe_device_probe() style.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi at intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c | 21 ++-----------------
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt.c     | 37 ++++++++++++++++------------------
>  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_gt.h     |  1 -
>  3 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> index e519f435b1606..bea626f6b4cbf 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_device.c
> @@ -743,7 +743,6 @@ int xe_device_probe(struct xe_device *xe)
>  	struct xe_tile *tile;
>  	struct xe_gt *gt;
>  	int err;
> -	u8 last_gt;
>  	u8 id;
>  
>  	xe_pat_init_early(xe);
> @@ -851,18 +850,16 @@ int xe_device_probe(struct xe_device *xe)
>  		return err;
>  
>  	for_each_gt(gt, xe, id) {
> -		last_gt = id;
> -
>  		err = xe_gt_init(gt);
>  		if (err)
> -			goto err_fini_gt;
> +			return err;

So it's either all or nothing? Can't we operate with atleast what we have?

Raag