Hi
On 1/11/24 00:56, Kim Phillips wrote:
Hi,
On 1/9/24 4:11 AM, Jarkko Nikula wrote> On 1/9/24 09:56, V, Narasimhan
wrote:
* Looks like the issue is with this below commit:
* i2c: designware: Fix lock probe call order in dw_i2c_plat_probe()
Hmm... This makes me even more confused since your device AMDI0010
should not even use the access semaphore.
So linux-next works if you run a commit before it or revert these
three patches? (commit 2f571a725434 ("i2c: designware: Fix lock probe
call order in dw_i2c_plat_probe()") doesn't revert without reverting
two other related commits after it)
git show f9b51f600217b38f46ea39d6aa445e594bf3eb30 |patch -p1 -R
git show b8034c7d28a988be82efbf4d65faa847334811f7 |patch -p1 -R
git show 2f571a72543463ef07dc3ac61e7b703b9ad997f9 |patch -p1 -R
Narasimhan is right, if I check out, build and boot this commit:
2f571a725434 i2c: designware: Fix lock probe call order in
dw_i2c_plat_probe()
I get the same stacktrace on the serial console.
If I try the previous commit (174a0c565cea "efi/loongarch: Directly
position the loaded image file"),
the system boots fine.
The same thing happens with the three reversions above:
next-20240110 gets the stacktrace, but with the three
reversions, it doesn't.
Thanks, I just sent a fix reverting those commits.
Is your parallel post probe runtime suspending time window
theory no longer applicable? These AMD EPYC systems have a
lot more cores than their client equivalents, and AMD power
management code has had a lot of improvements lately.
It still a mystery to me but I let Andy to figure out it if he wants to
during next development cycle :-)
