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>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
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 11:59:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191011105923.GB5122@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7655fb41-cd13-0bc4-e656-040e0875bab8@arm.com>
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 11:38:17AM +0100, James Morse wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> On 11/10/2019 11:05, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 11:26:04AM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> >> 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.
>
> I just tried this on my r1, v5.4-rc1 with this configuration worked just fine.
>
> My cmdline is:
> | root=/dev/sda6 loglevel=9 earlycon=pl011,0x7ff80000 hugepagesz=2M hugepages=512
> | crashkernel=1G console=ttyAMA0 resume=/dev/sda2 no_console_suspend efi=debug
>
>
> >> 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.
>
> ... same ... this uboot binary looks like the main difference.
> Is it using u-boots UEFI support? Is it possible to turn that off?
>
Did give a quick try with mainline uboot on my Juno R2 and it boots fine.
Not sure if EFI support is default there. I am using vexpress_aemv8a_juno_defconfig
> It may that lockdep is just perturbing the size of the binary. It adds an
> extra 4MB for me.
The image size was 35MB.
I was thinking if it has some wrongly configured firmware, but since
defconfig works, it must have sane firmware.
--
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: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
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 11:59:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191011105923.GB5122@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7655fb41-cd13-0bc4-e656-040e0875bab8@arm.com>
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 11:38:17AM +0100, James Morse wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> On 11/10/2019 11:05, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 11:26:04AM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> >> 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.
>
> I just tried this on my r1, v5.4-rc1 with this configuration worked just fine.
>
> My cmdline is:
> | root=/dev/sda6 loglevel=9 earlycon=pl011,0x7ff80000 hugepagesz=2M hugepages=512
> | crashkernel=1G console=ttyAMA0 resume=/dev/sda2 no_console_suspend efi=debug
>
>
> >> 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.
>
> ... same ... this uboot binary looks like the main difference.
> Is it using u-boots UEFI support? Is it possible to turn that off?
>
Did give a quick try with mainline uboot on my Juno R2 and it boots fine.
Not sure if EFI support is default there. I am using vexpress_aemv8a_juno_defconfig
> It may that lockdep is just perturbing the size of the binary. It adds an
> extra 4MB for me.
The image size was 35MB.
I was thinking if it has some wrongly configured firmware, but since
defconfig works, it must have sane firmware.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-11 10:59 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
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 [this message]
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=20191011105923.GB5122@bogus \
--to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@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.