[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMi1Hd1WF77UF0khEs0XFFvS05issVNo1=sxY9e+VcNFFOCcuQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2023 18:36:42 +0530
From: Amit Pundir <amit.pundir@...aro.org>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>,
Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly@...aro.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: qcom-rpmh: Revert "regulator: qcom-rpmh: Use PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS"
On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 at 13:00, Amit Pundir <amit.pundir@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Jun 2023 at 19:35, Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org> wrote:
> >
> > If you reorder the nodes in the device tree, I think it'll change the
> > probe order. Does that affect anything? I'm wondering if there's some
> > sort of delayed reaction from a previous regulator.
>
> Hi, Bumping lvs1 and lvs2 regulators up to the top of the list in the
> DTS https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5975#c4 does seem to work.
> I can't reproduce the crash in 125 reboots so far, while I'm still
> testing with only qcom-rpmh-regulator kernel module. I'll do some more
> testing with full system running and send this re-ordering fix I can't
> reproduce the crash further.
Hi, successfully rebooted AOSP with v6.4-rc4 on DB845c about 100+
times with this above mentioned lvs nodes reordering in the device
tree. I don't see any obvious functionality breakage in my limited
smoke testing so far either. I'll post this workaround/fix for review
on the lkml.
Regards,
Amit Pundir
Powered by blists - more mailing lists