On 2021-10-21 11:57, Kent Russell wrote:
> When a GPU hits the bad_page_threshold, it will not be initialized by
> the amdgpu driver. This means that the table cannot be cleared, nor can
> information gathering be performed (getting serial number, BDF, etc).
>
> If the bad_page_threshold kernel parameter is set to -2,
> continue to initialize the GPU, while printing a warning to dmesg that
> this action has been done
>
> Cc: Luben Tuikov <[email protected]>
> Cc: Mukul Joshi <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Kent Russell <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Felix Kuehling <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Luben Tuikov <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h | 1 +
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c | 2 +-
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c | 12 ++++++++----
> 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h
> index d58e37fd01f4..b85b67a88a3d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu.h
> @@ -205,6 +205,7 @@ extern struct amdgpu_mgpu_info mgpu_info;
> extern int amdgpu_ras_enable;
> extern uint amdgpu_ras_mask;
> extern int amdgpu_bad_page_threshold;
> +extern bool amdgpu_ignore_bad_page_threshold;
> extern struct amdgpu_watchdog_timer amdgpu_watchdog_timer;
> extern int amdgpu_async_gfx_ring;
> extern int amdgpu_mcbp;
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
> index 96bd63aeeddd..eee3cf874e7a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_drv.c
> @@ -877,7 +877,7 @@ module_param_named(reset_method, amdgpu_reset_method,
> int, 0444);
> * result in the GPU entering bad status when the number of total
> * faulty pages by ECC exceeds the threshold value.
> */
> -MODULE_PARM_DESC(bad_page_threshold, "Bad page threshold(-1 = auto(default
> value), 0 = disable bad page retirement)");
> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(bad_page_threshold, "Bad page threshold(-1 = auto(default
> value), 0 = disable bad page retirement, -2 = ignore bad page threshold)");
> module_param_named(bad_page_threshold, amdgpu_bad_page_threshold, int, 0444);
>
> MODULE_PARM_DESC(num_kcq, "number of kernel compute queue user want to setup
> (8 if set to greater than 8 or less than 0, only affect gfx 8+)");
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c
> index ce5089216474..bd6ed43b0df2 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c
> @@ -1104,11 +1104,15 @@ int amdgpu_ras_eeprom_init(struct
> amdgpu_ras_eeprom_control *control,
> res = amdgpu_ras_eeprom_correct_header_tag(control,
>
> RAS_TABLE_HDR_VAL);
> } else {
> - *exceed_err_limit = true;
> - dev_err(adev->dev,
> - "RAS records:%d exceed threshold:%d, "
> - "GPU will not be initialized. Replace this GPU
> or increase the threshold",
> + dev_err(adev->dev, "RAS records:%d exceed threshold:%d",
> control->ras_num_recs,
> ras->bad_page_cnt_threshold);
I thought this would all go in a single set of patches. I wasn't aware a
singleton patch went in already which changed just this line--this change was
always a part of a patch set.
Regards,
Luben
> + if (amdgpu_bad_page_threshold == -2) {
> + dev_warn(adev->dev, "GPU will be initialized
> due to bad_page_threshold = -2.");
> + res = 0;
> + } else {
> + *exceed_err_limit = true;
> + dev_err(adev->dev, "GPU will not be
> initialized. Replace this GPU or increase the threshold.");
> + }
> }
> } else {
> DRM_INFO("Creating a new EEPROM table");
