From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: ARM Juno r1 + CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y => boot failure
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 11:05:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191011100521.GA5122@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <33a83dce-e9f0-7814-923b-763d33e70257@samsung.com>
Hi Marek,
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 11:26:04AM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> Hi
>
> Recently I've got access to ARM Juno R1 board and did some tests with
> current mainline kernel on it. I'm a bit surprised that enabling
> CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING causes a boot failure on this board. After enabling
> this Kconfig option, I get no single message from the kernel, although I
> have earlycon enabled.
>
I don't have Juno R1 but I tried defconfig + CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING and
it boots fine.
So if you disable CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING(i.e. defconfig) boots fine ?
Are you using DTB from the mainline ?
> I've did my test with default defconfig and current linux-next,
> v5.4-rc1, v5.3 and v4.19. In all cases the result is the same. I'm
> booting kernel using a precompiled uboot from Linaro release and TFTP
> download.
>
OK, I use UEFI+GRUB but I don't think that should cause any issue.
> Is this a known issue? Other ARM64 boards I have access to (Samsung TM2e
> and RaspberryPi3) boots fine with the same kernel image.
>
Not that I am aware of. If you could send me the bootlog with defconfig
I can take a look and see if I get any clue.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Subject: Re: ARM Juno r1 + CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y => boot failure
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 11:05:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191011100521.GA5122@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <33a83dce-e9f0-7814-923b-763d33e70257@samsung.com>
Hi Marek,
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 11:26:04AM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> Hi
>
> Recently I've got access to ARM Juno R1 board and did some tests with
> current mainline kernel on it. I'm a bit surprised that enabling
> CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING causes a boot failure on this board. After enabling
> this Kconfig option, I get no single message from the kernel, although I
> have earlycon enabled.
>
I don't have Juno R1 but I tried defconfig + CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING and
it boots fine.
So if you disable CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING(i.e. defconfig) boots fine ?
Are you using DTB from the mainline ?
> I've did my test with default defconfig and current linux-next,
> v5.4-rc1, v5.3 and v4.19. In all cases the result is the same. I'm
> booting kernel using a precompiled uboot from Linaro release and TFTP
> download.
>
OK, I use UEFI+GRUB but I don't think that should cause any issue.
> Is this a known issue? Other ARM64 boards I have access to (Samsung TM2e
> and RaspberryPi3) boots fine with the same kernel image.
>
Not that I am aware of. If you could send me the bootlog with defconfig
I can take a look and see if I get any clue.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-11 10:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20191011092604eucas1p1ca11ab9c4c7508776914b0eb4f35e69b@eucas1p1.samsung.com>
2019-10-11 9:26 ` ARM Juno r1 + CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y => boot failure Marek Szyprowski
2019-10-11 10:05 ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2019-10-11 10:05 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-11 10:21 ` Marek Szyprowski
2019-10-11 10:21 ` Marek Szyprowski
2019-10-11 10:38 ` James Morse
2019-10-11 10:38 ` James Morse
2019-10-11 10:59 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-11 10:59 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-11 13:02 ` Marek Szyprowski
2019-10-11 13:02 ` Marek Szyprowski
2019-10-11 13:10 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-11 13:10 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-11 13:15 ` Marek Szyprowski
2019-10-11 13:15 ` Marek Szyprowski
2019-10-11 13:43 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-11 13:43 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-11 14:42 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-11 14:42 ` Sudeep Holla
2019-10-14 9:02 ` Marek Szyprowski
2019-10-14 9:02 ` Marek Szyprowski
2019-10-14 10:16 ` James Morse
2019-10-14 10:16 ` James Morse
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191011100521.GA5122@bogus \
--to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liviu.dudau@arm.com \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.