[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170918081109.GA11661@amd>
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 10:11:09 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, pali.rohar@...il.com,
sre@...nel.org, kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, khilman@...nel.org,
aaro.koskinen@....fi, ivo.g.dimitrov.75@...il.com,
patrikbachan@...il.com, serge@...lyn.com, abcloriens@...il.com,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Subject: Linux-next broken for 2 weeks was Re: n900 in next-20170901
Hi!
> > > > After commit 9caf25f996e8, user for CMA memory should use to check
> > > > PageHighmem in order to get proper virtual address of the page. If
> > > > someone doesn't use it, it is possible to use wrong virtual address
> > > > and it then causes the use of wrong physical address.
> > > > CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL would catch this case.
> > >
> > > OK, no extra output of current next with CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL=y.
> > > Booting of n900 hangs with just the same error:
> > >
> > > save_secure_sram() returns 0000ff02
> > >
> > > > If it doesn't help, is there a way to test n900 configuration in QEMU?
> > >
> > > I doubt that QEMU n900 boots in secure mode but instead shows
> > > the SoC as general purpose SoC. If so, you'd have to patch the
> > > omap3_save_secure_ram_context() to attempt to save secure RAM
> > > context in all cases. If that works then debugging with any
> > > omap3 board like beagleboard in QEMU should work.
> >
> > Okay, linux-next from today still does not boot on n900. Is it
> > something new, or was this still not fixed in -next?
>
> Hello,
>
> Still not fixed in -next since I cannot regenerate the error.
Unfortunately, rest of the world can reproduce the error, and it means
linux-next is useless for us.
I'd expect you to drop the relevant tree from linux-next when the
error was reported. Clearly, those patches are unsuitable for 4.15, as
they are broken, so they should not be in linux-next.
Thanks,
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists