From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: santosh.shilimkar@ti.com (Santosh Shilimkar) Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 10:19:24 -0400 Subject: omap4-panda-es boot issues with v3.15-rc4 In-Reply-To: <5371D35A.2040506@ti.com> References: <536B7E44.2040303@ti.com> <7hppjos2w2.fsf@paris.lan> <20140508165558.GB2198@atomide.com> <20140508184055.GC2198@atomide.com> <7hha4zsyro.fsf@paris.lan> <536C9084.50209@ti.com> <7heh02ms82.fsf@paris.lan> <20140511155542.GD28266@atomide.com> <53713FCF.3000006@ti.com> <20140512220741.GG5668@atomide.com> <5371D35A.2040506@ti.com> Message-ID: <537229EC.1050404@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tuesday 13 May 2014 04:10 AM, Roger Quadros wrote: > On 05/13/2014 01:07 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: >> * Santosh Shilimkar [140512 14:41]: >>> On Sunday 11 May 2014 11:55 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: >>>> * Kevin Hilman [140509 16:46]: >>>>> Roger Quadros writes: >>>>> >>>>>> Kevin, >>>>>> >>>>>> On 05/09/2014 01:15 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote: >>>>>>> Tony Lindgren writes: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ..but I think I found the cause for recent hangs on panda, just a wild >>>>>>>> guess based on looking at the recent cpuidle patches after v3.14. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Looks like reverting 0b89e9aa2856 (cpuidle: delay enabling interrupts >>>>>>>> until all coupled CPUs leave idle) makes booting work reliably again >>>>>>>> on panda. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Can you guys confirm, so far no issues here after few boot tests, >>>>>>>> but it might be too early to tell. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Reverting that makes things a bit more stable, but it still eventually >>>>>>> fails in the same way. For me it took 8 boots for it to eventually >>>>>>> fail. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However, if I build with CONFIG_CPU_IDLE=n, it becomes much more stable >>>>>>> (20+ boots in a row and still going.) >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Can you please test with CPU_IDLE enabled but C3 disabled as in below patch? >>>>>> It worked for me 10/10 boots. >>>>> >>>>> Yup, it worked for me too for 10/10 boots in a row. >>>> >>>> But what has caused this regression, does it work reliably with let's >>>> say v3.13 or v3.12? >>>> >>> IIRC things were stable till some CPUIDLE code consolidation happened. >>> I don't recall exactly but some one did discuss about it a while back. >> >> OK that's good to hear. >> >>> Can you re-run your test-cases with patch at end of the email. This >>> is just a hunch so don't blame me if I waste your time testing the >>> patch. >> >> Seems to work after adding "#include ". I did about 10 >> reboots and they all succeeded for me. Without your revert, I'm getting >> a hang (with sysrq not working) about 1/3 of the boots. >> >> Kevin, Roger, does the revert from Santosh work for you too? >> > > next-20140508 worked for me 10/10 times with Santosh's patch. > The heartbeat LED behaves normally as well. So I like it :). > Great. Will post the patch with change log updated and cc you guys. Regards, Santosh