From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail11.truemail.it (mail11.truemail.it [217.194.8.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 205811BBBE4; Fri, 15 Nov 2024 14:47:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.194.8.81 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1731682051; cv=none; b=R9O5Xr0xI6p8y566zGEKvwL5YZc1uMzQhwBisvUkyIbeYGz1+tNJx4JDCLfYk7Y+MErTPHB5R1I1Mj9uYFGa4W8my3ZZF52BNUHFkey/zbKcT4nCHe94CXqDjzVirgz9MN/BBI1GRycNVeGMUMST8S9ORGNwMhSZ3F6vObh2rMQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1731682051; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Qg8gnVAsmfCB/g7+xbU0TVaPP29VNMj1CAYSqDn76Lw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=YyBYNZqhQD/bluWtq/gu6jn1RTyZ/wt2R/ZHtkdMfyH8FPwxUOz2pwyFNM9oHMHX1DXyOeFyy85Bi/1oqzV1Tm2Q5i8Fre976l6Rl9pTPvjmVEJpxRwHfVoWU2Mz4svXpEb64LLuQvsNtUwRUZRSvWcOUjDy597gdI3Mqwr+vmY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=dolcini.it; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dolcini.it; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dolcini.it header.i=@dolcini.it header.b=qhmIrwRV; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.194.8.81 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=dolcini.it Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dolcini.it Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dolcini.it header.i=@dolcini.it header.b="qhmIrwRV" Received: from gaggiata.pivistrello.it (93-49-2-63.ip317.fastwebnet.it [93.49.2.63]) by mail11.truemail.it (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 069631FABF; Fri, 15 Nov 2024 15:47:20 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dolcini.it; s=default; t=1731682040; bh=dEafRjM9IWWfFCvBUry05pVj1A8yYFWrnbi6Fe6UClU=; h=Received:From:To:Subject; b=qhmIrwRVvBxbRBpDh+0Cndd7H7nsHSH1iQwB+RU1HjFWFGA/ccBxUuSpSLWYs4lX/ GtRu+OmFXYLqXpsOG4rNgzvkA/EAa6NIlgK1qro/Gq/wAIvwjXJi1AomDpEtzrvX4W NlSpqSreFmjXDIm4wqKcY6OnJSmUlNL4Bk8Dvf5Q7L8bx9/D5qE8IgtNbrByFg75zq 2qq8R8fa7Q49KMMFFdDL001NvzWZQafkiqV5bTLgYfP0eMBgJO14za7ofXy5RII266 tXHayEA+eydm1jiFD35vxDy5eQ11sL/HwxHsFByit33wmpYpKDjJ9p4c9jH0j1sxLi K+rTZenRyeg/Q== Received: by gaggiata.pivistrello.it (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A6EFC7F9AA; Fri, 15 Nov 2024 15:47:19 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2024 15:47:19 +0100 From: Francesco Dolcini To: Shengjiu Wang Cc: Francesco Dolcini , Shengjiu Wang , Frank Li , abelvesa@kernel.org, peng.fan@nxp.com, mturquette@baylibre.com, sboyd@kernel.org, shawnguo@kernel.org, s.hauer@pengutronix.de, kernel@pengutronix.de, festevam@gmail.com, linux-imx@nxp.com, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, regressions@lists.linux.dev, Adam Ford , Alexander Stein , Mark Brown , ulf.hansson@linaro.org Subject: Re: clk_imx8mp_audiomix_runtime_resume Kernel panic regression on v6.12 Message-ID: References: <20241007132555.GA53279@francesco-nb> <20241112075958.GA8092@francesco-nb> <20241112092054.GA18139@francesco-nb> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-clk@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 11:13:58AM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote: > On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 5:20 PM Francesco Dolcini wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 08:59:58AM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2024 at 03:25:55PM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote: > > > > it seems that an old regression is back on v6.12, reproduced on -rc2 > > > > (not sure about rc1). > > > > > > > > The original report is from https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240424164725.GA18760@francesco-nb/ > > > > and it was fixed with https://lore.kernel.org/all/1715396125-3724-1-git-send-email-shengjiu.wang@nxp.com/. > > > > > > > > Is it now back? > > > > > > I was able to reproduce this issue once more, this time with 6.11.7. > > > As I wrote in another email the issue is not systematic as it used to > > > be. > > > > > > Any idea? > > > > Frank, Shengjiu, could it be that the udelay(5) in imx_pgc_power_up() is > > too short and therefore we have such non-systematic failures? > > > > Francesco, it seems hard to reproduce it on my i.MX8MP-EVK board. > > If it is easy to reproduce on your side, you can try to enlarge the delay > time to see if there is any improvement. It's hard also for me to reproduce, we just have a relatively extensive test farm and 2 times it happened while doing unrelated tests. I was hoping we could have some idea on what's going on, I'll see if I can put together some kind of stress test, being able to reproduce it more systematically would certainly help. Francesco