On Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 03:47:20PM +0530, Riana Tauro wrote:
> Add error-event support for Correctable errors in CRI.
> error-event is reported to userspace for all errors that crossed
> threshold on receiving an interrupt for correctable errors.
...
> +static void ras_send_error_event(struct xe_device *xe, u8 severity, u8
> component)
> +{
> + u8 drm_severity, drm_component;
> + u32 value;
> + int ret;
> +
> + drm_severity = xe_to_drm_ras_severity(severity);
> + if (drm_severity == DRM_XE_RAS_ERR_SEV_MAX)
> + return;
> +
> + drm_component = xe_to_drm_ras_component(component);
> + if (drm_component == DRM_XE_RAS_ERR_COMP_MAX)
> + return;
> +
> + ret = xe_ras_get_counter(xe, severity, component, &value);
> + if (ret)
> + return;
> +
> + xe_drm_ras_event(xe, drm_component, drm_severity, value, GFP_KERNEL);
> +}
> +
> void xe_ras_counter_threshold_crossed(struct xe_device *xe,
> struct xe_sysctrl_event_response
> *response)
> {
> @@ -152,6 +203,8 @@ void xe_ras_counter_threshold_crossed(struct xe_device
> *xe,
> severity = errors[id].common.severity;
> component = errors[id].common.component;
>
> + ras_send_error_event(xe, severity, component);
We already have error-value as part of the event, so this looks like
a lot of redundant duplicate events if threshold is set high enough.
I'm wondering if we use a local variable as a bitmap for components
(which we set here) and only send event for_each_set_bit() after the
loop?
Raag
> xe_warn(xe, "[RAS]: %s %s detected\n",
> comp_to_str(component), sev_to_str(severity));
> }
> --
> 2.47.1
>
