On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 04:33:10PM +0000, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]>
>
> This avoids confusing log message sequences such as:
>
> [] i915/skl_huc_ver01_07_1398.bin fw status: fetch SUCCESS, load SUCCESS
> [] HuC DMA transfer wait over with ret 0
> [] i915/skl_huc_ver01_07_1398.bin fw status: fetch SUCCESS, load SUCCESS
>
> Signed-off-by: Tvrtko Ursulin <[email protected]>
> Cc: Anusha Srivatsa <[email protected]>
> Cc: Michał Winiarski <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc.c
> index e660109fc51e..8cf104350e5b 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_huc.c
> @@ -213,6 +213,8 @@ int intel_huc_load(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> if (huc_fw->fetch_status == INTEL_UC_FIRMWARE_NONE)
> return 0;
>
> + huc_fw->load_status = INTEL_UC_FIRMWARE_PENDING;
> +
> DRM_DEBUG_DRIVER("%s fw status: fetch %s, load %s\n",
> huc_fw->path,
> intel_uc_fw_status_repr(huc_fw->fetch_status),
> @@ -222,8 +224,6 @@ int intel_huc_load(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv)
> huc_fw->load_status == INTEL_UC_FIRMWARE_FAIL)
> return -ENOEXEC;
Please also remove above "if" statement as this will never be true any more ;)
Btw, it looks that your patch will likely fix the case when previous fw
loading fails, as in case of reaching (fetch=SUCCESS,load=FAIL) status
we're always returning -ENOEXEC.
-Michal
>
> - huc_fw->load_status = INTEL_UC_FIRMWARE_PENDING;
> -
> switch (huc_fw->fetch_status) {
> case INTEL_UC_FIRMWARE_FAIL:
> /* something went wrong :( */
> --
> 2.9.3
>
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
