[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151005150032.GA12137@odux.rfo.atmel.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 16:00:32 +0100
From: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...el.com>
To: Peter Rosin <peda@...ator.liu.se>
CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
Christian Gmainer <christian.gmeiner@...il.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...el.com>,
Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Regression: at24 eeprom writing
Hi Peter
On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 10:45:29AM +0200, Peter Rosin wrote:
> On 2015-10-03 01:05, Peter Rosin wrote:
[...]
> Ok, I found the culprit, and I double and triple checked it this time...
>
> If I move to the very latest on the linux-3.18-at91 branch, the bug is
> there too. Which made it vastly more palatable to bisect the bug.
>
> The offender (in the 4.2 kernel) is 93563a6a71bb69dd324fc7354c60fb05f84aae6b
> "i2c: at91: fix a race condition when using the DMA controller"
> which is far more understandable. Ao, adding Cyrille Pitchen to the Cc list.
>
Thanks for the bisecting effort. I am currently at ELCE where I have
met someone with the same kind of issue. Is it easily reproducible? It
doesn't seem to be the case for him.
I'll have a look once back.
> If I add that patch on top of my previously working tree, it behaves just
> as newer kernels, i.e. equally bad. The patch doesn't revert cleanly, but
> reverting the patch and quick-n-dirty-fixing the conflict on vanilla 4.2
> makes the problem go away.
>
> I have attached what I actually reverted.
>
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
Ludovic
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists