From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pankaj Dubey Subject: Re: kernel panic when booting on exynos 5440 Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 16:23:46 +0530 Message-ID: <549BECBA.4060707@samsung.com> References: <549BE7CC.1000005@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailout1.samsung.com ([203.254.224.24]:50607 "EHLO mailout1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751996AbaLYKxZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Dec 2014 05:53:25 -0500 Received: from epcpsbgr1.samsung.com (u141.gpu120.samsung.co.kr [203.254.230.141]) by mailout1.samsung.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-24.01 (7.0.4.24.0) 64bit (built Nov 17 2011)) with ESMTP id <0NH400DYUWWZAL60@mailout1.samsung.com> for linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org; Thu, 25 Dec 2014 19:53:23 +0900 (KST) In-reply-to: Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Ming Lei Cc: Russell King , Kukjin Kim , linux-arm-kernel , linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Abraham On Thursday 25 December 2014 04:13 PM, Ming Lei wrote: > On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Pankaj Dubey wrote: >> +CC: Thomas Abraham >> >> Hi Ming, >> >> On Thursday 25 December 2014 02:18 PM, Ming Lei wrote: >>> >>> Hi Pankaj, >>> >>> In your commit fce9e5bb2(ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for >>> mapping PMU base address via DT), 'pmu_base_addr' is >>> only parsed for very limited machines from the table of >>> 'exynos_dt_pmu_match'. For other boards, 'pmu_base_addr' >>> will keep its default value of null, then panic() is triggered. >>> >> >> Yes, it will. >> As exynos5440 DT does not have PMU device node, neither above mentioned >> patch added corresponding matching device_id. >> If I remember correctly, I might have missed this because exynos5440 DT was >> not having PMU node. >> >>> What do you think about the problem? >> >> >> I missed this part, and I should have taken care of this in original patch >> itself. Well as of now I can think of only one solution that if we really >> want to keep support for exynos5440 in mainline kernel, to avoid above issue >> we should skip pmu mapping for exynos5440. In this case following patch will >> do this work. >> >> Also I will like to know from Kukjin that what best can be done now. >> If he is OK with below solution I can post the same. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Subject: [PATCH] ARM: EXYNOS: do not try to map PMU for exynos5440 >> >> Commit id: 2e94ac42898f84d76e3c21dd91bc is not taking care >> of mapping of exynos5440 PMU register which will result in kernel panic. >> As of now let's avoid mapping of exynos5440 PMU. >> >> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey >> --- >> arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c | 3 ++- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c >> index c13d083..1891b8c 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c >> @@ -208,7 +208,8 @@ static void __init exynos_init_irq(void) >> * DT is not unflatten so we can't use DT APIs before >> * init_irq >> */ >> - exynos_map_pmu(); >> + if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440")) >> + exynos_map_pmu(); >> } > > If I remember correctly, there are other SoCs which have not been > included in the pmu mapping list, and looks these SoCs need > to be handled too. > As far as I can see in today's linux-next and kgene/for-next tree, only exynos5440 PMU mapping is missing. If I am missing anything please specify exact SoC name, which you think need to be handled. Thanks, Pankaj Dubey > > Thanks, > Ming Lei > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: pankaj.dubey@samsung.com (Pankaj Dubey) Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 16:23:46 +0530 Subject: kernel panic when booting on exynos 5440 In-Reply-To: References: <549BE7CC.1000005@samsung.com> Message-ID: <549BECBA.4060707@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thursday 25 December 2014 04:13 PM, Ming Lei wrote: > On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Pankaj Dubey wrote: >> +CC: Thomas Abraham >> >> Hi Ming, >> >> On Thursday 25 December 2014 02:18 PM, Ming Lei wrote: >>> >>> Hi Pankaj, >>> >>> In your commit fce9e5bb2(ARM: EXYNOS: Add support for >>> mapping PMU base address via DT), 'pmu_base_addr' is >>> only parsed for very limited machines from the table of >>> 'exynos_dt_pmu_match'. For other boards, 'pmu_base_addr' >>> will keep its default value of null, then panic() is triggered. >>> >> >> Yes, it will. >> As exynos5440 DT does not have PMU device node, neither above mentioned >> patch added corresponding matching device_id. >> If I remember correctly, I might have missed this because exynos5440 DT was >> not having PMU node. >> >>> What do you think about the problem? >> >> >> I missed this part, and I should have taken care of this in original patch >> itself. Well as of now I can think of only one solution that if we really >> want to keep support for exynos5440 in mainline kernel, to avoid above issue >> we should skip pmu mapping for exynos5440. In this case following patch will >> do this work. >> >> Also I will like to know from Kukjin that what best can be done now. >> If he is OK with below solution I can post the same. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Subject: [PATCH] ARM: EXYNOS: do not try to map PMU for exynos5440 >> >> Commit id: 2e94ac42898f84d76e3c21dd91bc is not taking care >> of mapping of exynos5440 PMU register which will result in kernel panic. >> As of now let's avoid mapping of exynos5440 PMU. >> >> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey >> --- >> arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c | 3 ++- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c >> index c13d083..1891b8c 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/exynos.c >> @@ -208,7 +208,8 @@ static void __init exynos_init_irq(void) >> * DT is not unflatten so we can't use DT APIs before >> * init_irq >> */ >> - exynos_map_pmu(); >> + if (!of_machine_is_compatible("samsung,exynos5440")) >> + exynos_map_pmu(); >> } > > If I remember correctly, there are other SoCs which have not been > included in the pmu mapping list, and looks these SoCs need > to be handled too. > As far as I can see in today's linux-next and kgene/for-next tree, only exynos5440 PMU mapping is missing. If I am missing anything please specify exact SoC name, which you think need to be handled. Thanks, Pankaj Dubey > > Thanks, > Ming Lei >