On 30/06/2022 19:21, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 06:01:09PM +0000, Conor.Dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> On 30/06/2022 18:53, Sudeep Holla wrote: >>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 04:28:26PM +0000, Niklas Cassel wrote: >>>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 07:43:29PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: >>>>> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> Hey all, >>>>> This series should rid us of dtbs_check errors for the RISC-V Canaan k210 >>>>> based boards. To make keeping it that way a little easier, I changed the >>>>> Canaan devicetree Makefile so that it would build all of the devicetrees >>>>> in the directory if SOC_CANAAN. >>>>> >>>>> I *DO NOT* have any Canaan hardware so I have not tested any of this in >>>>> action. Since I sent v1, I tried to buy some since it's cheap - but could >>>>> out of the limited stockists none seemed to want to deliver to Ireland :( >>>>> I based the series on next-20220617. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I first tried to apply your series on top of next-20220630, >>>> but was greeted by a bunch of different warnings on boot, >>>> including endless RCU stall warnings. >>>> However, even when booting next-20220630 without your patches, >>>> I got the same warnings and RCU stall. >>>> >>> >>> Is it possible to share the boot logs please ? >>> Conor is having issues with my arch_topology/cacheinfo updates in -next. >>> I would like to know if your issue is related to that or not ? >>> >>>> So I tested your series on top of v5.19-rc4 + >>>> commit 0397d50f4cad ("spi: dt-bindings: Move 'rx-sample-delay-ns' to >>>> spi-peripheral-props.yaml") cherry-picked, >>>> (in order to avoid conflicts when applying your series,) >>>> and the board was working as intended, no warnings or RCU stalls. >>>> >>> >>> If possible can you give this branch[1] a try where my changes are and doesn't >>> have any other changes from -next. Sorry to bother you. >>> >>> Conor seem to have issue with this commit[2], so if you get issues try to >>> check if [3] works. >> >> FWIW, my problems with that are not on canaan hw. > > I understand that, just helps to eliminate and see what are the possible > issues. No no, I meant that for Niklas' benefit not yours. I get why you wanna know :)