[Buildroot] [PATCH v1 1/5] board/xilinx/patches/linux: add linux 6.6.40 hash

[Buildroot] [PATCH v1 1/5] board/xilinx/patches/linux: add linux 6.6.40 hash

[Neal Frager via buildroot]

Add the hash for the Linux 6.6.40 release for Xilinx products.

The release tag was missing a patch, so it is being added here for users that
bump to Linux 6.6.40.  The patch has already been committed to the linux-xlnx
repo.

Upstream: https://github.com/Xilinx/linux-xlnx/commit/5365c13a86998da06d845c918f849b30b8735538

Signed-off-by: Neal Frager <neal.frager@amd.com>
---
 ...dmaengine-xilinx-dpdma-removed-extra.patch | 54 +++++++++++++++++++
 board/xilinx/patches/linux/linux.hash         |  1 +
 2 files changed, 55 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 board/xilinx/patches/linux/0001-dmaengine-xilinx-dpdma-removed-extra.patch

diff --git a/board/xilinx/patches/linux/0001-dmaengine-xilinx-dpdma-removed-extra.patch b/board/xilinx/patches/linux/0001-dmaengine-xilinx-dpdma-removed-extra.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..f5008f7dc3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/board/xilinx/patches/linux/0001-dmaengine-xilinx-dpdma-removed-extra.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+From 5365c13a86998da06d845c918f849b30b8735538 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Rohit Visavalia <rohit.visavalia@amd.com>
+Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 23:53:29 -0700
+Subject: [PATCH] dmaengine: xilinx: dpdma: removed extra vchan lock
+
+There were redundant spinlock for virtual dma channel
+Removal of this fixes crash at xilinx_dpdma_chan_queue_transfer
+
+[ 2876.675266] Call trace:
+[ 2876.677701]  xilinx_dpdma_chan_queue_transfer+0x4c/0x200
+[ 2876.683004]  __handle_irq_event_percpu+0x58/0x170
+[ 2876.687698]  handle_irq_event+0x64/0x11c
+[ 2876.691606]  handle_fasteoi_irq+0xc0/0x220
+[ 2876.695693]  __handle_domain_irq+0x7c/0xe0
+[ 2876.699775]  gic_handle_irq+0x78/0xa0
+[ 2876.703428]  el1_irq+0xc4/0x180
+[ 2876.706563]  arch_cpu_idle+0x18/0x30
+[ 2876.710131]  default_idle_call+0x24/0x74
+[ 2876.714045]  do_idle+0x238/0x2ac
+[ 2876.717265]  cpu_startup_entry+0x28/0x60
+[ 2876.721171]  rest_init+0xbc/0xcc
+[ 2876.724384]  arch_call_rest_init+0x10/0x1c
+[ 2876.728463]  start_kernel+0x4ec/0x524
+[ 2876.732113] Code: d2802008 d2802447 f2fbd5a8 a9400823 (f9000462)
+[ 2876.738200] ---[ end trace 1c82d54670104ec1 ]---
+[ 2876.742804] Kernel panic - not syncing: Oops: Fatal exception in interrupt
+[ 2876.749662] SMP: stopping secondary CPUs
+[ 2876.753571] Kernel Offset: disabled
+[ 2876.757049] CPU features: 0x0040002,20002004
+[ 2876.761301] Memory Limit: none
+[ 2876.764343] ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Oops: Fatal exception in interrupt ]---
+
+Signed-off-by: Rohit Visavalia <rohit.visavalia@amd.com>
+Signed-off-by: Neal Frager <neal.frager@amd.com>
+Upstream: https://github.com/Xilinx/linux-xlnx/commit/5365c13a86998da06d845c918f849b30b8735538
+---
+ drivers/dma/xilinx/xilinx_dpdma.c | 1 -
+ 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
+
+diff --git a/drivers/dma/xilinx/xilinx_dpdma.c b/drivers/dma/xilinx/xilinx_dpdma.c
+index ca9374ebaf3f..db4a5c2dd226 100644
+--- a/drivers/dma/xilinx/xilinx_dpdma.c
++++ b/drivers/dma/xilinx/xilinx_dpdma.c
+@@ -1182,7 +1182,6 @@ static void xilinx_dpdma_chan_vsync_irq(struct  xilinx_dpdma_chan *chan)
+ 	chan->desc.active = pending;
+ 	chan->desc.pending = NULL;
+ 
+-	spin_lock(&chan->vchan.lock);
+ 	xilinx_dpdma_chan_queue_transfer(chan);
+ 	spin_unlock(&chan->vchan.lock);
+
+-- 
+2.25.1
+
diff --git a/board/xilinx/patches/linux/linux.hash b/board/xilinx/patches/linux/linux.hash
index d85f773478..e34e86757b 100644
--- a/board/xilinx/patches/linux/linux.hash
+++ b/board/xilinx/patches/linux/linux.hash
@@ -1,2 +1,3 @@
 # Locally calculated
 sha256  ea85988e66b9a2e19ccd76d0f5f5e657988a873fed292160917712f45605a805  xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1.tar.gz
+sha256  c46fbcb45b2c7da919663119eeab2581bb36b6238ae809a71e19013291d9054c  xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_merge_6.6.40.tar.gz
-- 
2.25.1

_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Buildroot] [PATCH v1 2/5] configs/zynq_zc702_defconfig: bump to 6.6.40

[Neal Frager via buildroot]

This patch bumps the zynq_zc702_defconfig to Linux kernel 6.6.40.

Signed-off-by: Neal Frager <neal.frager@amd.com>
---
 configs/zynq_zc702_defconfig | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/configs/zynq_zc702_defconfig b/configs/zynq_zc702_defconfig
index 75ebc2a3ba..f3fc32145b 100644
--- a/configs/zynq_zc702_defconfig
+++ b/configs/zynq_zc702_defconfig
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ BR2_ROOTFS_POST_BUILD_SCRIPT="board/zynq/post-build.sh"
 BR2_ROOTFS_POST_IMAGE_SCRIPT="board/zynq/post-image.sh"
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL=y
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL=y
-BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION="$(call github,Xilinx,linux-xlnx,xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1)/xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1.tar.gz"
+BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION="$(call github,Xilinx,linux-xlnx,xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_merge_6.6.40)/xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_merge_6.6.40.tar.gz"
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_DEFCONFIG="xilinx_zynq"
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_UIMAGE=y
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_UIMAGE_LOADADDR="0x8000"
-- 
2.25.1

_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Buildroot] [PATCH v1 3/5] configs/zynq_zc706_defconfig: bump to 6.6.40

[Neal Frager via buildroot]

This patch bumps the zynq_zc706_defconfig to Linux kernel 6.6.40.

Signed-off-by: Neal Frager <neal.frager@amd.com>
---
 configs/zynq_zc706_defconfig | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/configs/zynq_zc706_defconfig b/configs/zynq_zc706_defconfig
index ce539eefaf..f1c9bd6622 100644
--- a/configs/zynq_zc706_defconfig
+++ b/configs/zynq_zc706_defconfig
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ BR2_ROOTFS_POST_BUILD_SCRIPT="board/zynq/post-build.sh"
 BR2_ROOTFS_POST_IMAGE_SCRIPT="board/zynq/post-image.sh"
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL=y
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL=y
-BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION="$(call github,Xilinx,linux-xlnx,xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1)/xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1.tar.gz"
+BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION="$(call github,Xilinx,linux-xlnx,xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_merge_6.6.40)/xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_merge_6.6.40.tar.gz"
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_DEFCONFIG="xilinx_zynq"
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_UIMAGE=y
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_UIMAGE_LOADADDR="0x8000"
-- 
2.25.1

_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Buildroot] [PATCH v1 4/5] configs/zynq_microzed_defconfig: bump to 6.6.40

[Neal Frager via buildroot]

This patch bumps the zynq_microzed_defconfig to Linux kernel 6.6.40.

Signed-off-by: Neal Frager <neal.frager@amd.com>
---
 configs/zynq_microzed_defconfig | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/configs/zynq_microzed_defconfig b/configs/zynq_microzed_defconfig
index f955a0c4ad..71a5d880b3 100644
--- a/configs/zynq_microzed_defconfig
+++ b/configs/zynq_microzed_defconfig
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ BR2_ROOTFS_POST_BUILD_SCRIPT="board/zynq/post-build.sh"
 BR2_ROOTFS_POST_IMAGE_SCRIPT="board/zynq/post-image.sh"
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL=y
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL=y
-BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION="$(call github,Xilinx,linux-xlnx,xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1)/xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1.tar.gz"
+BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION="$(call github,Xilinx,linux-xlnx,xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_merge_6.6.40)/xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_merge_6.6.40.tar.gz"
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_DEFCONFIG="xilinx_zynq"
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_UIMAGE=y
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_UIMAGE_LOADADDR="0x8000"
-- 
2.25.1

_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

[Buildroot] [PATCH v1 5/5] configs/zynq_zed_defconfig: bump to 6.6.40

[Neal Frager via buildroot]

This patch bumps the zynq_zed_defconfig to Linux kernel 6.6.40.

Signed-off-by: Neal Frager <neal.frager@amd.com>
---
 configs/zynq_zed_defconfig | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/configs/zynq_zed_defconfig b/configs/zynq_zed_defconfig
index 925faeac8e..cada3bbd47 100644
--- a/configs/zynq_zed_defconfig
+++ b/configs/zynq_zed_defconfig
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ BR2_ROOTFS_POST_BUILD_SCRIPT="board/zynq/post-build.sh"
 BR2_ROOTFS_POST_IMAGE_SCRIPT="board/zynq/post-image.sh"
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL=y
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL=y
-BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION="$(call github,Xilinx,linux-xlnx,xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1)/xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1.tar.gz"
+BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_CUSTOM_TARBALL_LOCATION="$(call github,Xilinx,linux-xlnx,xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_merge_6.6.40)/xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_merge_6.6.40.tar.gz"
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_DEFCONFIG="xilinx_zynq"
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_UIMAGE=y
 BR2_LINUX_KERNEL_UIMAGE_LOADADDR="0x8000"
-- 
2.25.1

_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v1 1/5] board/xilinx/patches/linux: add linux 6.6.40 hash

[Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot]

Hello Neal,

On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 11:58:09 +0100
Neal Frager via buildroot <buildroot@buildroot.org> wrote:

> Add the hash for the Linux 6.6.40 release for Xilinx products.
> 
> The release tag was missing a patch, so it is being added here for users that
> bump to Linux 6.6.40.  The patch has already been committed to the linux-xlnx
> repo.
> 
> Upstream: https://github.com/Xilinx/linux-xlnx/commit/5365c13a86998da06d845c918f849b30b8735538
> 
> Signed-off-by: Neal Frager <neal.frager@amd.com>

I'm not sure I'm a big fan of the approach of doing this addition in
PATCH 1/5, and then changing the defconfigs one after the other. I see
two problems:

- In PATCH 1/5, you're adding a kernel patch, but do you realize that
  with only PATCH 1/5 applied, your kernel patch will be applied to the
  existing defconfigs, that use the xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1 kernel ?

  It turns out you're lucky, as the patch applies fine on
  xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1, but in the general case that would not
  work.

- After applying all patches, you still have the hash of
  xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1.tar.gz, but I don't know if it's still
  used by some other defconfigs.

So I see several approaches here:

- Don't use a shared board/xilinx/patches/ folder, and use one per
  board, like is done in board/freescale/. This allows to update
  defconfigs independently from each other.

- Update all defconfigs that use board/xilinx/patches/ in one single
  commit.

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v1 1/5] board/xilinx/patches/linux: add linux 6.6.40 hash

[Frager, Neal via buildroot]

Hi Thomas,

> Add the hash for the Linux 6.6.40 release for Xilinx products.
> 
> The release tag was missing a patch, so it is being added here for users that
> bump to Linux 6.6.40.  The patch has already been committed to the linux-xlnx
> repo.
> 
> Upstream: https://github.com/Xilinx/linux-xlnx/commit/5365c13a86998da06d845c918f849b30b8735538
> 
> Signed-off-by: Neal Frager <neal.frager@amd.com>

> I'm not sure I'm a big fan of the approach of doing this addition in
> PATCH 1/5, and then changing the defconfigs one after the other. I see
> two problems:

> - In PATCH 1/5, you're adding a kernel patch, but do you realize that
>   with only PATCH 1/5 applied, your kernel patch will be applied to the
>  existing defconfigs, that use the xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1 kernel ?

>  It turns out you're lucky, as the patch applies fine on
>  xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1, but in the general case that would not
>  work.

Yes, I was aware of this, and verified that it would be ok before submitting
the patch set like this.  However, I see your point and I will re-submit.

> - After applying all patches, you still have the hash of
>   xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_2024.1.tar.gz, but I don't know if it's still
>  used by some other defconfigs.

> So I see several approaches here:

> - Don't use a shared board/xilinx/patches/ folder, and use one per
>  board, like is done in board/freescale/. This allows to update
>  defconfigs independently from each other.

> - Update all defconfigs that use board/xilinx/patches/ in one single
>  commit.

From my view, it is best to keep the shared hash files since there are now 12
xilinx defconfigs using this and soon to be 13.

Since it only requires a single line change in the defconfig files, I will
squash this into a single patch that updates all 12 defconfigs to Linux 6.6.40.

Best regards,
Neal Frager
AMD
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v1 1/5] board/xilinx/patches/linux: add linux 6.6.40 hash

[Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot]

On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 14:26:24 +0000
"Frager, Neal" <neal.frager@amd.com> wrote:

> From my view, it is best to keep the shared hash files since there are now 12
> xilinx defconfigs using this and soon to be 13.
> 
> Since it only requires a single line change in the defconfig files, I will
> squash this into a single patch that updates all 12 defconfigs to Linux 6.6.40.

But are you able to test that those 12 (soon 13) defconfigs all build
and boot fine when doing such updates to all defconfigs at the same time?

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v1 1/5] board/xilinx/patches/linux: add linux 6.6.40 hash

[Frager, Neal via buildroot]

Hi Thomas,

> From my view, it is best to keep the shared hash files since there are now 12
> xilinx defconfigs using this and soon to be 13.
> 
> Since it only requires a single line change in the defconfig files, I will
> squash this into a single patch that updates all 12 defconfigs to Linux 6.6.40.

> But are you able to test that those 12 (soon 13) defconfigs all build
> and boot fine when doing such updates to all defconfigs at the same time?

I have 10 of the 12 boards (11 of 13 when the versal_vek280 is added).

I do not actually have a zynq_microzed or a zynq_zed board, but these are
mature enough that I believe testing on the zynq_zc702 and zynq_zc706 should
be sufficient for covering these boards.

So far, I have tested the 6.6.40 release on the zynq_zc702 and zynq_zc706
boards, which is why I only submitted the zynq defconfigs so far.  Now that I
will squash all of them into one patch, I will go through zynqmp and versal
testing as well.

I will create the squashed patch, and then go through the build and run
process on all the boards.  Once complete, I will submit the patch.  It will
probably take me a couple days.

Please note that outside of my testing, our software team has already tested
this 6.6.40 release on all of the boards, so I am really just doing a sanity
check.

Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Best regards,
Neal Frager
AMD
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v1 1/5] board/xilinx/patches/linux: add linux 6.6.40 hash

[Frager, Neal via buildroot]

Hi Thomas,


> From my view, it is best to keep the shared hash files since there are now 12
> xilinx defconfigs using this and soon to be 13.
> 
> Since it only requires a single line change in the defconfig files, I will
> squash this into a single patch that updates all 12 defconfigs to Linux 6.6.40.

> But are you able to test that those 12 (soon 13) defconfigs all build
> and boot fine when doing such updates to all defconfigs at the same time?

> I have 10 of the 12 boards (11 of 13 when the versal_vek280 is added).

> I do not actually have a zynq_microzed or a zynq_zed board, but these are
> mature enough that I believe testing on the zynq_zc702 and zynq_zc706 should
> be sufficient for covering these boards.

> So far, I have tested the 6.6.40 release on the zynq_zc702 and zynq_zc706
> boards, which is why I only submitted the zynq defconfigs so far.  Now that I
> will squash all of them into one patch, I will go through zynqmp and versal
> testing as well.

> I will create the squashed patch, and then go through the build and run
> process on all the boards.  Once complete, I will submit the patch.  It will
> probably take me a couple days.

> Please note that outside of my testing, our software team has already tested
> this 6.6.40 release on all of the boards, so I am really just doing a sanity
> check.

> Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Also, in supporting Linux LTS, we plan to do release tags 10 tags at a time
in addition to the .1 and .2 releases we do each year.

So 6.6.40 then 6.6.50 then 6.6.60, etc.

We will only be doing it for the latest LTS.  Meaning just Linux 6.6 this year,
and Linux 6.(12 or 13?) next year.

We are also upstreaming our software as quickly as possible, but since we have
a large number of patches not yet mainline, this is our short term solution
for supporting Linux LTS until we can promote customers using the mainline
Linux kernel.

Best regards,
Neal Frager
AMD
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v1 1/5] board/xilinx/patches/linux: add linux 6.6.40 hash

[Frager, Neal via buildroot]

Hi Thomas,

> From my view, it is best to keep the shared hash files since there are now 12
> xilinx defconfigs using this and soon to be 13.
> 
> Since it only requires a single line change in the defconfig files, I will
> squash this into a single patch that updates all 12 defconfigs to Linux 6.6.40.

> But are you able to test that those 12 (soon 13) defconfigs all build
> and boot fine when doing such updates to all defconfigs at the same time?

We have a better solution now.  I got our team to re-do the release tag for
Linux 6.6.40, so that all the needed patches are included now.

https://github.com/Xilinx/linux-xlnx/commits/xlnx_rebase_v6.6_LTS_merge_6.6.40/

Now we no longer need to add the patch to the buildroot source tree.

Best regards,
Neal Frager
AMD
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v1 1/5] board/xilinx/patches/linux: add linux 6.6.40 hash

[Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot]

On Thu, 8 Aug 2024 09:10:45 +0000
"Frager, Neal" <neal.frager@amd.com> wrote:

> We have a better solution now.  I got our team to re-do the release tag for
> Linux 6.6.40, so that all the needed patches are included now.

Re-do a tag that has been published, arg. You want to break build
systems like Buildroot? :-/

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH v1 1/5] board/xilinx/patches/linux: add linux 6.6.40 hash

[Frager, Neal via buildroot]

Hi Thomas,

> We have a better solution now.  I got our team to re-do the release tag for
> Linux 6.6.40, so that all the needed patches are included now.

> Re-do a tag that has been published, arg. You want to break build
> systems like Buildroot? :-/

The tag was only published yesterday at my request.  As far as I know, no one
was using this tag yet, so changing it should not have broken anything.

In any case, now that we use hashes for everything, we should be protected from
tag changes.  If a tag gets changed, the hash check will fail.

But in general, I fully agree with you that changing a published tag is bad
practice.  I only requested it this time, so we could avoid needing to add a
patch in buildroot which should not have been necessary.

Best regards,
Neal Frager
AMD
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot