On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 06:18:02PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote: > > On 07/12/2016 14:22, Joonas Lahtinen wrote: > >Add WARN_ON to find_fw_domain to registers related to uninitialized > >hardware. > > > >v2: > >- Print the uninitialized domains and register (Chris) > > > >Cc: Imre Deak <[email protected]> > >Cc: Wang Elaine <[email protected]> > >Cc: Chris Wilson <[email protected]> > >Signed-off-by: Joonas Lahtinen <[email protected]> > >--- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c | 9 ++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > >diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c > >b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c > >index 07779d0..88f3611 100644 > >--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c > >+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_uncore.c > >@@ -625,7 +625,14 @@ find_fw_domain(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, u32 > >offset) > > dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains_table_entries, > > fw_range_cmp); > > > >- return entry ? entry->domains : 0; > >+ if (!entry) > >+ return 0; > >+ > >+ WARN(entry->domains & ~dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains, > >+ "Uninitialized forcewake domain(s) 0x%x accessed at 0x%x\n", > >+ entry->domains & ~dev_priv->uncore.fw_domains, offset); > >+ > >+ return entry->domains; > > } > > > > static void > > > > Only slight issues I can spot is that for some platforms, should it > trigger, it would trigger twice since > intel_uncore_forcewake_for_read/write functions have the same WARN.
I don't think that's too much of an issue whilst both are WARN() - we are likely to get a flood of hits if we get any. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
