From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ezequiel Garcia Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] 3.14-rc2 boot failure on Kirkwood (qnap ts-119p+) Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 18:17:24 -0300 Message-ID: <20140216211723.GA8291@localhost> References: <21248.39509.418884.931848@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <20140216143735.GA8680@localhost> <20140216202957.GC26583@lunn.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from top.free-electrons.com ([176.31.233.9]:35462 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753396AbaBPVVk (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Feb 2014 16:21:40 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140216202957.GC26583@lunn.ch> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Lunn Cc: Mikael Pettersson , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 09:29:57PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 11:45:20AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > > Hi Mikael, > >=20 > > On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 12:00:37PM +0100, Mikael Pettersson wrote: > > > My Kirkwood box worked fine with the 3.13 kernel, but with 3.14-r= c2 > > > boot always fails due to a kernel NULL dereference in __clk_put. > > >=20 > > > This is a non-DT kernel, with: > > >=20 > > > CONFIG_ARCH_KIRKWOOD=3Dy > > > CONFIG_KIRKWOOD_LEGACY=3Dy > > > CONFIG_MACH_TS219=3Dy > > > # CONFIG_ARCH_KIRKWOOD_DT is not set > > >=20 > >=20 > > Thanks for the report. I thought this issue was already fixed, but = I > > cannot find it on either the mailing lists or linux-next. > >=20 > > So, in case it hasn't been fixed here's an untested fix for you to = test. > > Please try this patch and let us know. > >=20 > > Your SATA won't work but if the patch is OK the kernel wont't blow = away. > >=20 > > Andrew? Do we support the new phy requirement in non-DT platforms? [..] >=20 > I consider Non-DT kirkwood now pretty much near death. Probably with > 3.16 it will of gone altogether. So i did not plan for Non-DT to > support SATA phy. I did however want it to at least boot, so i broke > something here :-( >=20 I'm pretty sure v3.14-rc{3,4} will be fine for DT and non-DT plaforms, as Mikael already reported linux-next works. Non-DT Kirkwood would behave just as Armada 370/XP platforms, where a SATA phy is not registered. > I will take a look at your fix and what we can expect in the next -rc= =2E >=20 AFAICS, the patch is a fix on its own, and should be merged (after we'r= e happy with it) for v3.14. --=20 Ezequiel Garc=C3=ADa, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering http://free-electrons.com