From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01E8BC433EF for ; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 21:42:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBD1F603E9 for ; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 21:42:02 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org BBD1F603E9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=baylibre.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=nzLC806WRCUnCokj0VjlrJ+sDTBuDsNG3j5ht2te6Ac=; b=hfEC919bOfPnzb 8MA6nPIlPKt0KECkgbdrpoBiSaLE+I7pDzaWapVjpU6D482VWh3UM+UUS0PmZAX5RR6Kri32zOL8e NWayEcmrBuBerZUqKbmtYIrZ7U6qQh6fhLX+nZ1QlZHQBTstn8JT41kBQDcTgL1vOGxVmydSEcZiO bPJzqSOBBgVrwfsno+eNe1p8SkXOgaqSiDJh+jJd8/FoBk1e9N3EXah+2L13bNFgznwSegtDn1Skx f2ndy2vwQ+0MlbPi+otT8OIfyTZgH/HU9oXvDAC7v22aAWZxOeUBD+ob3Nih8H5iHW9rwIEm/dezb 8zuPaXy9Dp0qH3dTiFTg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mi1WO-0034J6-MT; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 21:40:44 +0000 Received: from mail-wr1-x42b.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::42b]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mi1WI-0034G6-NJ for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 21:40:41 +0000 Received: by mail-wr1-x42b.google.com with SMTP id b12so595370wrh.4 for ; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 14:40:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=baylibre-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=RRy2HKxizQGRbNFKYHU7Hj+PY9O55ysIFI9KaBWKaSA=; b=eqHIPKXJm1t0gcggH43OKyXXE4dxQf6kL354n9N4erFZ6vZfG/TIMx1Xtpa7kimEzJ IdnG5ZemJ84or97zTpkagOHIkCDa7oXYXwm713aJ14zdMt00g0u8dgyrsKOzCgEyGvm5 VDOgO9njmkYW6dHoiCeefLSx2uQRrh5CpE7ETJkd86lb1omt/8NpwfK9LEU2sK2QX9bn RvI8YmFJGUGbIKmUWiAqNvlpR01C7zB2EOjPvJDZw0CnKKAqpFbL1mDSZ3o2PqSGs9xr bBbkXsELmFm7/8bhPV97vSjZaEDIcNfMsIkmvbcTq9Ly/KOJ4STkSH3SOwP/dqNMuqPV NhOw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=RRy2HKxizQGRbNFKYHU7Hj+PY9O55ysIFI9KaBWKaSA=; b=jVszRMtzB2x0lo2mqDGLh+pTlfHbO7STtbheLtcid1beXCp4muD4G805kDi+1xuvwO GKB9jwE5dKNqscVA08Z5d2DYMqnnN4FUzgl3bpTItZ6XmRLsxhTy+Uz3tHVT7Roi/mBd 972aRqNaOV3MThodREvhBdZJS0CiO5NGXnbR1MXU4O1emht+drxPgQ7unE6EPbozzCAG pgp4ZmRDDFKbsns7ATNLs2ujgr4NYK3tg4NT884m7IhhmINrE01Psl0sHmDE8ICSU4pX oFgR08UYbSFxyak3SE1k2SmXaDMHK6OFeOBLl2bn5QKzpdQ3yp4o5edPXf6injf0VrzT zClw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531KsWkwUSG/To7JW/8Z661DDFM1qjLAulKuWH7tVtQl1OVfg2ZG fs+PcjXld2v2ERpuuQDrWAxAtQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJynKNEWhOofitXQB1sS8+qf4ZeclaLzHS7NkDhbro0v/6poqmdF9U094egDD0VH8W8f4CU1Qw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4890:: with SMTP id g16mr51914613wrq.10.1635889233579; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 14:40:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Red ([2a01:cb1d:3d5:a100:264b:feff:fe03:2806]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id p13sm4218448wmi.0.2021.11.02.14.40.32 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 02 Nov 2021 14:40:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2021 22:40:31 +0100 From: LABBE Corentin To: Guillaume Tucker Cc: Alex Bee , Robin Murphy , Martin Blumenstingl , Kevin Hilman , sboyd@kernel.org, heiko@sntech.de, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, "kernelci@groups.io" , Collabora Kernel ML , Chen-Yu Tsai Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: composite: Also consider .determine_rate for rate + mux composites Message-ID: References: <163425193558.1688384.15520943968787313145@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> <20211015120559.3515645-1-martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> <04a58d50-634b-fa20-95b4-eb6831f77e85@collabora.com> <3e42ae24-8db4-fb11-edf2-a25bca47ecae@arm.com> <49a0dda1-8d0f-580c-d92d-de759b51edb3@gmail.com> <31d462cb-1158-dd13-0ca8-46d54d2502f5@collabora.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <31d462cb-1158-dd13-0ca8-46d54d2502f5@collabora.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20211102_144038_795752_32A213B1 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 37.34 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Le Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 07:58:42AM +0000, Guillaume Tucker a =E9crit : > +Kevin +Corentin > = > On 01/11/2021 22:41, Alex Bee wrote: > > Hi Guillaume, > > = > > Am 01.11.21 um 23:11 schrieb Robin Murphy: > >> On 2021-11-01 21:59, Robin Murphy wrote: > >>> On 2021-11-01 20:58, Martin Blumenstingl wrote: > >>>> Hi Guillaume, > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 9:19 PM Guillaume Tucker > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi Martin, > >>>>> > >>>>> Please see the bisection report below about a boot failure on > >>>>> rk3328-rock64. > >>>>> > >>>>> Reports aren't automatically sent to the public while we're > >>>>> trialing new bisection features on kernelci.org but this one > >>>>> looks valid. > >>>>> > >>>>> Some more details can be found here: > >>>>> > >>>>> =A0=A0 https://linux.kernelci.org/test/case/id/617f11f5c157b666fb33= 58e6/ > >>>>> > >>>>> Here's what appears to be the cause of the problem: > >>>>> > >>>>> [=A0=A0=A0 0.033465] CPU: CPUs started in inconsistent modes > >>>>> [=A0=A0=A0 0.033557] Unexpected kernel BRK exception at EL1 > >>>>> [=A0=A0=A0 0.034432] Internal error: BRK handler: f2000800 [#1] PRE= EMPT SMP > >>> > >>> What's weird is that that's really just the same WARN that's also > >>> present in 'successful' logs, except for some reason it's behaving as > >>> if the break handler hasn't been registered, despite that having > >>> happened long before we got to smp_init(). At this point we're also > >>> still some way off getting as far as initcalls, so I'm not sure that > >>> the clock driver would be in the picture at all yet. > >>> > >>> Is the bisection repeatable, or is this just random flakiness > >>> misleading things? I'd also note that you need pretty horrifically > >>> broken firmware to hit that warning in the first place, which might > >>> cast a bit of doubt over the trustworthiness of that board altogether. > = > The bisection has checks to avoid false positives, so tests that > produce flaky results won't normally lead to a report like this. > Then they're manually triaged, and there were 2 separate > bisections that landed on this same commit. > = > >> Ah, on closer inspection it might be entirely repeatable for a given > >> kernel build, but with the behaviour being very sensitive to code/data > >> segment layout changes... > >> > >> ... > >> 23:44:24.457917=A0 Filename '1007060/tftp-deploy-dvdnydcw/kernel/Image= '. > >> 23:44:24.460178=A0 Load address: 0x2000000 > >> ... > >> 23:44:27.180962=A0 Bytes transferred =3D 33681920 (201f200 hex) > >> ... > >> 23:44:27.288135=A0 Filename > >> '1007060/tftp-deploy-dvdnydcw/ramdisk/ramdisk.cpio.gz.uboot'. > >> 23:44:27.288465=A0 Load address: 0x4000000 > >> ... > = > That is indeed where the remaining false positives are still > likely to be coming from, when the infrastructure consistently > causes test failures following particular kernel revisions. I > don't think there's an easy way to rule those out, but we can try > to address them one by one at least. > = > In the case of colliding address ranges in the bootloader, we > could add a check with the "good" revision and extra data in the > kernel image to make it at least as big as the "bad" revision... > = > > could you try updating u-boot to more recent version: the ramdisk > > address has been moved [1] to 0x06000000 in v2020.01-rc5. > = > Thanks for investigating this. The board is in BayLibre's lab. > = > Corentin, Kevin, could you please take a look? > = Hello I tried to update uboot on it but failed for today. I found only how to flash sdcard (doiing it remotly), but the board boots S= PI first (and I saw no documentation on how to flash SPI). I need to have physical access to change this. So probably later this week. Regards _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel