On Thu, Apr 03, 2025 at 09:24:47AM -0700, Cavitt, Jonathan wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Briano, Ivan <ivan.bri...@intel.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2025 4:22 PM
> To: Cavitt, Jonathan <jonathan.cav...@intel.com>
> Cc: intel...@lists.freedesktop.org; Gupta, saurabhg
> <saurabhg.gu...@intel.com>; Zuo, Alex <alex....@intel.com>;
> joonas.lahti...@linux.intel.com; Brost, Matthew <matthew.br...@intel.com>;
> Zhang, Jianxun <jianxun.zh...@intel.com>; Lin, Shuicheng
> <shuicheng....@intel.com>; dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; Wajdeczko, Michal
> <michal.wajdec...@intel.com>; Mrozek, Michal <michal.mro...@intel.com>;
> Jadav, Raag <raag.ja...@intel.com>; Harrison, John C
> <john.c.harri...@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 3/5] drm/xe/uapi: Define drm_xe_vm_get_property
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 10:26:54PM +0000, Jonathan Cavitt wrote:
> > > +/** struct xe_vm_fault - Describes faults for
> > > %DRM_XE_VM_GET_PROPERTY_FAULTS */
> > > +struct xe_vm_fault {
> > > + /** @address: Address of the fault */
> > > + __u64 address;
> > > + /** @address_precision: Precision of faulted address */
> > > + __u32 address_precision;
> > > + /** @access_type: Type of address access that resulted in fault */
> > > + __u8 access_type;
> > > + /** @fault_type: Type of fault reported */
> > > + __u8 fault_type;
> > > + /** @fault_level: fault level of the fault */
> > > + __u8 fault_level;
> > > + /** @pad: MBZ */
> > > + __u8 pad;
> > > + /** @reserved: MBZ */
> > > + __u64 reserved[4];
> > > +};
> >
> > Are the possible values here documented somewhere or should be just
> > follow bspec for them?
>
> I think bspec is currently being used for access_type, fault_type, and
> fault_level.
> However, I can add the possible values to the kernel docs if you feel that is
> pertinent.
>
It's more of a question of API stability. If the HW changes how it
reports this, do we get different values in different platforms, or do
we want to fix them here?
