linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Revert "regulator: qcom-rpmh: Revert "regulator: qcom-rpmh: Use PROBE_FORCE

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAMi1Hd2ukv2iu343hJ+r9SzQ1eZjGB0YPHUB5oxjKwsJ4XKyww@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 May 2023 20:48:02 +0530
From:   Amit Pundir <amit.pundir@...aro.org>
To:     Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>
Cc:     Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "regulator: qcom-rpmh: Revert "regulator:
 qcom-rpmh: Use PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS""

On Wed, 24 May 2023 at 19:21, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten
Leemhuis) <regressions@...mhuis.info> wrote:
>
> [CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
> https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.html]
>
> On 15.05.23 16:53, Amit Pundir wrote:
> > This reverts commit ad44ac082fdff7ee57fe125432f7d9d7cb610a23.
> >
> > This patch restores the synchronous probing for
> > qcom-rpmh-regulator because asynchronous probing broke
> > Dragonboard 845c (SDM845) running AOSP. UFSHC fail to
> > initialize properly and DB845c fails to boot regardless
> > of "rootwait" bootarg being present or not
> > https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5975.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Amit Pundir <amit.pundir@...aro.org>
> > ---
> >  drivers/regulator/qcom-rpmh-regulator.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/regulator/qcom-rpmh-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/qcom-rpmh-regulator.c
> > index b0a58c62b1e2..30659922b0aa 100644
> > --- a/drivers/regulator/qcom-rpmh-regulator.c
> > +++ b/drivers/regulator/qcom-rpmh-regulator.c
> > @@ -1517,7 +1517,7 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, rpmh_regulator_match_table);
> >  static struct platform_driver rpmh_regulator_driver = {
> >       .driver = {
> >               .name = "qcom-rpmh-regulator",
> > -             .probe_type = PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS,
> > +             .probe_type = PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS,
> >               .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(rpmh_regulator_match_table),
> >       },
> >       .probe = rpmh_regulator_probe,
>
> Amit, just wondering: what happened to this? It seems there was some
> agreement to go down this route to fix your regression, but then nothing
> happened anymore since about a week. Or am I missing something?

Hi, I didn't get around to try out new things last week as suggested
on the original thread [1]. I'll get back to debugging it later in the
week hopefully.

Regards,
Amit Pundir
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAD=FV=VSFDe445WEVTHXxU1WS_HGUV5jR5E8_Vgd4eyhn3rHyA@mail.gmail.com/

>
> Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat)
> --
> Everything you wanna know about Linux kernel regression tracking:
> https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/about/#tldr
> If I did something stupid, please tell me, as explained on that page.
>
> #regzbot ^backmonitor:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAMi1Hd1avQDcDQf137m2auz2znov4XL8YGrLZsw5edb-NtRJRw@mail.gmail.com/