From 5c64e5c768beca6ad1468aa6cc50307f54402053 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Xiang Liu <xiang.liu@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2026 16:51:18 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: dump RAS EEPROM table via debugfs

When the RAS core manages the EEPROM, the eeprom_control is never
initialized (amdgpu_ras_init_badpage_info() returns early), so reading
ras/ras_eeprom_table in debugfs printed only a zeroed header and no
records, even though bad-page records exist in the RAS core EEPROM.

Source the table header and records from the RAS core EEPROM
(ras_core->ras_eeprom) in that case, reusing the existing output layout
so the debugfs node keeps the same format. Skip the dump when the
firmware manages the EEPROM, since the records are not stored in the
I2C-backed table then.

Signed-off-by: Xiang Liu <xiang.liu@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: Tao Zhou <tao.zhou1@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>
---
 .../gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c    | 84 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 84 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c
index fca2b49bc13b..36f584f05e2f 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_ras_eeprom.c
@@ -1398,6 +1398,86 @@ static ssize_t amdgpu_ras_debugfs_table_read(struct file *f, char __user *buf,
 	return res < 0 ? res : orig_size - size;
 }
 
+static ssize_t
+amdgpu_ras_debugfs_table_read_uniras(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
+				     char __user *buf,
+				     size_t size, loff_t *pos)
+{
+	struct amdgpu_ras_mgr *ras_mgr = amdgpu_ras_mgr_get_context(adev);
+	struct ras_core_context *ras_core = ras_mgr ? ras_mgr->ras_core : NULL;
+	struct eeprom_umc_record *records = NULL;
+	struct ras_eeprom_control *control;
+	size_t bufsz, len = 0;
+	u32 num_recs;
+	char *kbuf;
+	ssize_t res;
+	int i;
+
+	if (!ras_core)
+		return 0;
+
+	/* pmfw manages eeprom data by itself */
+	if (ras_fw_eeprom_supported(ras_core))
+		return 0;
+
+	control = &ras_core->ras_eeprom;
+	num_recs = ras_eeprom_get_record_count(ras_core);
+
+	bufsz = strlen(tbl_hdr_str) + tbl_hdr_fmt_size +
+		strlen(rec_hdr_str) + (size_t)rec_hdr_fmt_size * num_recs + 1;
+
+	kbuf = kvmalloc(bufsz, GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!kbuf)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	if (num_recs) {
+		records = kvcalloc(num_recs, sizeof(*records), GFP_KERNEL);
+		if (!records) {
+			res = -ENOMEM;
+			goto out;
+		}
+
+		res = ras_eeprom_read(ras_core, records, num_recs);
+		if (res)
+			goto out;
+	}
+
+	len += scnprintf(kbuf + len, bufsz - len, "%s", tbl_hdr_str);
+	len += scnprintf(kbuf + len, bufsz - len, tbl_hdr_fmt,
+				 control->tbl_hdr.header,
+				 control->tbl_hdr.version,
+				 control->tbl_hdr.first_rec_offset,
+				 control->tbl_hdr.tbl_size,
+				 control->tbl_hdr.checksum);
+	len += scnprintf(kbuf + len, bufsz - len, "%s", rec_hdr_str);
+
+	for (i = 0; i < num_recs; i++) {
+		u32 ai = RAS_RI_TO_AI(control, i);
+		int et = records[i].err_type;
+		const char *ets = (et >= 0 && et < AMDGPU_RAS_EEPROM_ERR_COUNT) ?
+				  record_err_type_str[et] : "na";
+
+		len += scnprintf(kbuf + len, bufsz - len, rec_hdr_fmt,
+				 i,
+				 RAS_INDEX_TO_OFFSET(control, ai),
+				 ets,
+				 records[i].bank,
+				 records[i].ts,
+				 records[i].offset,
+				 records[i].mem_channel,
+				 records[i].mcumc_id,
+				 records[i].retired_row_pfn);
+	}
+
+	res = simple_read_from_buffer(buf, size, pos, kbuf, len);
+
+out:
+	kvfree(records);
+	kvfree(kbuf);
+
+	return res;
+}
+
 static ssize_t
 amdgpu_ras_debugfs_eeprom_table_read(struct file *f, char __user *buf,
 				     size_t size, loff_t *pos)
@@ -1411,6 +1491,10 @@ amdgpu_ras_debugfs_eeprom_table_read(struct file *f, char __user *buf,
 	if (!size)
 		return size;
 
+	if (amdgpu_uniras_enabled(adev))
+		return amdgpu_ras_debugfs_table_read_uniras(adev, buf,
+						    size, pos);
+
 	if (!ras || !control) {
 		res = snprintf(data, sizeof(data), "Not supported\n");
 		if (*pos >= res)