On Tue, 10 Dec 2024, Genes Lists <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2024-12-10 at 10:58 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: >> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024, Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > > ... >> > > FYI 6.12.4 got a crash shortly after booting in dma_alloc_attrs - >> > > maybe >> > > triggered in ipu6_probe. Crash only happened on laptop with ipu6. >> > > All >> > > other machines are running fine. >> > >> > Have you read the dmesg further than the IPU6 related warning? The >> > IPU6 >> > driver won't work (maybe not even probe?) but if the system >> > crashes, it >> > appears unlikely the IPU6 drivers would have something to do with >> > that. >> > Look for warnings on linked list corruption later, they seem to be >> > coming >> > from the i915 driver. >> >> And the list corruption is actually happening in >> cpu_latency_qos_update_request(). I don't see any i915 changes in >> 6.12.4 >> that could cause it. >> >> I guess the question is, when did it work? Did 6.12.3 work? >> >> >> BR, >> Jani. > > > - 6.12.1 worked > > - mainline - works (but only with i915 patch set [1] otherwise there > are no graphics at all) > > [1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/141911/ > > - 6.12.3 - crashed (i see i915 not ipu6) and again it has > cpu_latency_qos_update_request+0x61/0xc0 Thanks for testing. There are no changes to either i915 or kernel/power between 6.12.1 and 6.12.4. There are some changes to drm core, but none that could explain this. Maybe try the same kernels a few more times to see if it's really deterministic? Not that I have obvious ideas where to go from there, but it's a clue nonetheless. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel
