[PATCH v1] drm/xe/vf: Fail migration recovery if fixups needed but platform not supported
Michal Wajdeczko
michal.wajdeczko at intel.com
Tue May 13 11:21:20 UTC 2025
On 13.05.2025 01:06, Tomasz Lis wrote:
> The post-migration recovery needs to be fully implemented for a
> specific platform in order to make continuation of workloads
> possible.
>
> New platforms introduce changes which affect the recovery procedure,
> and without a clear verification of support this leads to errors
> with no straight forward error message explaining the cause.
>
> This patch fixes that issue - it introduces a message to be logged
> when the current driver is known to not support the current platform.
>
> Wedging the driver immediately also decreases the amount of
> additional errors which would come afterwards if the driver continued
> operation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Lis <tomasz.lis at intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_sriov_vf.c | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_sriov_vf.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_sriov_vf.c
> index 2674fa948fda..f21f98f5d25f 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_sriov_vf.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_sriov_vf.c
> @@ -224,6 +224,11 @@ static void vf_post_migration_notify_resfix_done(struct xe_device *xe)
> drm_dbg(&xe->drm, "another recovery imminent, skipping notifications\n");
> }
>
> +static bool fixups_supported(struct xe_device *xe)
> +{
can we have some TODO comment here explaining what conditions we expect
to be added here? or maybe we can start with CONFIG_XE_DEBUG to indicate
early development phase?
> + return false;
> +}
> +
> static void vf_post_migration_recovery(struct xe_device *xe)
> {
> bool need_fixups;
> @@ -243,6 +248,11 @@ static void vf_post_migration_recovery(struct xe_device *xe)
> vf_post_migration_fixup_ctb(xe);
>
> vf_post_migration_notify_resfix_done(xe);
> + if (need_fixups && !fixups_supported(xe)) {
> + drm_err(&xe->drm, "migration recovery not supported by this module version\n");
we already have drm_err in the fail: section, do we need this extra one?
if yes, can we make the message more specific (and maybe the reason
should be printed in fixups_supported() as for now it's all magic)
also, since support likely will not change between one migration and the
other, maybe it should be just a single drm_info() message printed
during a VF boot that any later migration will fail, without waiting
until the first migration happen to surprise the user
> + err = -ENOTRECOVERABLE;
> + goto fail;
> + }
hmm, and this whole chunk seems to be placed in a wrong place - if
fixups are not supported, why did we attempt to fixup CTB few lines
above and claim that fixups are done? can you please explain
> xe_pm_runtime_put(xe);
> drm_notice(&xe->drm, "migration recovery ended\n");
> return;
More information about the Intel-xe
mailing list