Re: [PATCH v4 23/32] drm/xe/survivability: Report 'Runtime Mode enabled' status using SIGID

On 8/14/2026 9:06 AM, Tauro, Riana wrote:
> 
> 
> On 13-08-2026 18:16, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
>>
>> On 8/13/2026 1:40 PM, Mallesh, Koujalagi wrote:
>>> On 13-08-2026 12:44 am, Michal Wajdeczko wrote:
>>>> Report 'Runtime Mode' status using various xe_log() helpers.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko <[email protected]>
>>>> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <[email protected]>
>>>> Cc: Riana Tauro <[email protected]>
>>>> Cc: Aravind Iddamsetty <[email protected]>
>>>> Cc: Mallesh Koujalagi <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c | 10 +++++++---
>>>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c
>>>> index ebd288986c11..5d3315ac735c 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_survivability_mode.c
>>>> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
>>>>   #include "xe_mmio.h"
>>>>   #include "xe_nvm.h"
>>>>   #include "xe_pcode_api.h"
>>>> +#include "xe_printk.h"
>>>>   #include "xe_vsec.h"
>>>>     /**
>>>> @@ -405,7 +406,7 @@ void xe_survivability_mode_runtime_enable(struct xe_device *xe)
>>>>       struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(xe->drm.dev);
>>>>         if (!IS_DGFX(xe) || IS_SRIOV_VF(xe) || xe->info.platform < XE_BATTLEMAGE) {
>>>> -        dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Runtime Survivability Mode not supported\n");
>>>> +        xe_log_err(xe, SURVIVABILITY, -EOPNOTSUPP, "Runtime Mode not supported!\n");
>>>>           return;
>>>>       }
>>>>   @@ -413,11 +414,14 @@ void xe_survivability_mode_runtime_enable(struct xe_device *xe)
>>>>       create_survivability_sysfs(pdev);
>>>>         survivability->type = XE_SURVIVABILITY_TYPE_RUNTIME;
>>>> -    dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Runtime Survivability mode enabled\n");
>>>> +    xe_log_info(xe, SURVIVABILITY, "Runtime Mode enabled!\n");
> 
> This should be xe_log_err

do you want to include any specific errno here (like -ESTALE)
or just use 0 to do not include it in the message?

asking now, as I don't want to respin the whole series
after I make a wrong decision based on dice roll

having an extra errno in the dmesg/CPER along with SIGID will
likely help us write better documentation with resolutions

>>>>         xe_device_set_wedged_method(xe, DRM_WEDGE_RECOVERY_VENDOR);
>>>>       xe_device_declare_wedged(xe);
>>>> -    dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Firmware flash required, Please refer to the userspace documentation for more details!\n");
>>>> +
>>>> +    xe_log_info(xe, SURVIVABILITY, "Firmware flash required!\n");
>>> IMO, we need to use xe_log_err (recoverable) here instead of xe_log_info.
> 
> Same here.

ditto

> 
>>>
>>> Already mentioned in original changes [1], runtime firmware errors cause device unstable:
>>>
>>> [1] https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/tip/-/commit/a2ca0633a0fef925a0d8125d8f3e4495a5ecb310
>> but in recent comment [2] you said that Arch team wanted that to be logged as info rather than fatal
>>
>> [2] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/743324/?series=171022&rev=3#comment_1373731
>>
>> @Riana, @Rodrigo, @Aravind ?
>>
>> I need a decider here
>>
>>>
>>> As I know xe_survivability_mode_runtime_enable function need to carry errno as parameter to pass into xe_log_err,
>>>
>>> however we need to create separate refactor patch for that in future.
> 
> Why do we need error no here? It should be 0.
> 
> Thanks
> Riana
> 
> 
>>>
>>>
>>> With above changes:
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Mallesh Koujalagi <[email protected]>
>>>
>>>> +    xe_info(xe, "Please refer to the userspace documentation for more details how to flash the firmware on %s!\n",
>>>> +        xe->info.platform_name);
>>>>   }
>>>>     static void log_survivability_info(struct xe_device *xe)