On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 at 16:33, Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > arm64 dragonboard-410c boot failed while running linux next 2020915 due to > the kernel crash. > > metadata: > git branch: master > git repo: https://gitlab.com/Linaro/lkft/mirrors/next/linux-next > git describe: next-20200915 > make_kernelversion: 5.9.0-rc5 > kernel-config: > https://builds.tuxbuild.com/J5oDTkph2aj855oeGOd45Q/kernel.config > > > crash log: > ------------- > [ 3.517615] Synopsys Designware Multimedia Card Interface Driver > [ 3.524258] sdhci-pltfm: SDHCI platform and OF driver helper > [ 3.531302] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual > address dead000000000108 > [ 3.531396] Mem abort info: > [ 3.531460] sdhci_msm 7864900.sdhci: Got CD GPIO > [ 3.539182] ESR = 0x96000044 > [ 3.541953] ledtrig-cpu: registered to indicate activity on CPUs > [ 3.546692] EC = 0x25: DABT (current EL), IL = 32 bits > [ 3.546701] SET = 0, FnV = 0 > [ 3.555694] usbcore: registered new interface driver usbhid > [ 3.555703] usbhid: USB HID core driver > [ 3.561638] genirq: irq_chip msmgpio did not update eff. affinity > mask of irq 75 > [ 3.563908] EA = 0, S1PTW = 0 > [ 3.580792] Data abort info: > [ 3.583673] ISV = 0, ISS = 0x00000044 > [ 3.583900] NET: Registered protocol family 10 > [ 3.586785] CM = 0, WnR = 1 > [ 3.586794] [dead000000000108] address between user and kernel address ranges > [ 3.586806] Internal error: Oops: 96000044 [#1] PREEMPT SMP > [ 3.591869] Segment Routing with IPv6 > [ 3.594829] Modules linked in: > [ 3.594841] CPU: 2 PID: 7 Comm: kworker/u8:0 Not tainted > 5.9.0-rc5-next-20200915 #1 > [ 3.594844] Hardware name: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. APQ 8016 SBC (DT) > [ 3.594862] Workqueue: events_unbound async_run_entry_fn > [ 3.597959] NET: Registered protocol family 17 > [ 3.604991] pstate: 60000005 (nZCv daif -PAN -UAO BTYPE=--) > [ 3.605000] pc : __clk_put+0x40/0x140 > [ 3.605009] lr : __clk_put+0x2c/0x140 > [ 3.610613] 9pnet: Installing 9P2000 support > [ 3.614183] sp : ffff80001005bbe0 > [ 3.614189] x29: ffff80001005bbe0 > [ 3.617233] Key type dns_resolver registered > [ 3.624696] x28: 000000000000002e > [ 3.624701] x27: ffff00003b620a68 x26: ffff800011496568 > [ 3.624708] x25: ffff00003fcfe8f8 x24: ffff00003d30c410 > [ 3.632518] registered taskstats version 1 > [ 3.636931] x23: ffff800011495cf8 x22: ffff00003b620a40 > [ 3.636938] x21: ffff00003d30c400 x20: ffff00003b620580 > [ 3.636945] x19: ffff00003b64f380 x18: 0000000007824000 > [ 3.636951] x17: ffff00003b620a00 x16: ffff00003b6205d0 > [ 3.636958] x15: ffff8000119929f8 x14: ffffffffffffffff > [ 3.636965] x13: ffff800012947000 x12: ffff800012947000 > [ 3.636975] x11: 0000000000000020 > [ 3.641233] Loading compiled-in X.509 certificates > [ 3.646650] x10: 0101010101010101 > [ 3.646654] x9 : ffff8000107b4c84 x8 : 7f7f7f7f7f7f7f7f > [ 3.646661] x7 : ffff000009fe5880 x6 : 0000000000000000 > [ 3.646668] x5 : 0000000000000000 x4 : ffff000009fe5880 > [ 3.646674] x3 : ffff80001250d7a0 x2 : ffff000009fe5880 > [ 3.746653] x1 : ffff00003b64f680 x0 : dead000000000100 > [ 3.751949] Call trace: > [ 3.757243] __clk_put+0x40/0x140 > [ 3.759413] clk_put+0x18/0x28 > [ 3.762885] dev_pm_opp_put_clkname+0x30/0x58 > [ 3.765837] sdhci_msm_probe+0x288/0x9a8 > [ 3.770265] platform_drv_probe+0x5c/0xb0 > [ 3.774258] really_probe+0xf0/0x4d8 > [ 3.778163] driver_probe_device+0xfc/0x168 > [ 3.781810] __driver_attach_async_helper+0xbc/0xc8 > [ 3.785717] async_run_entry_fn+0x4c/0x1b0 > [ 3.790575] process_one_work+0x1c8/0x498 > [ 3.794741] worker_thread+0x54/0x428 > [ 3.798822] kthread+0x120/0x158 > [ 3.802467] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x30 > [ 3.805771] Code: 35000720 a9438660 f9000020 b4000040 (f9000401) > [ 3.809334] ---[ end trace 1a607a5ea6891b9f ]--- > > full test log link, > https://lkft.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/1765840#L2014 > https://lkft.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/1765842#L1960 > > -- > Linaro LKFT > https://lkft.linaro.org Naresh, thanks for reporting! There have been regressions related to the opp library this cycle, so I am wondering if Viresh may have any ideas, before going into more details. One thing that also changed from the sdhci-msm point of view, is that we enabled async probe [1]. This could be the thing that triggers an untested error path of the probe? Otherwise we can always try to revert "mmc: sdhci-msm: Unconditionally call dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table()", which I recently applied again after the earlier errors. Kind regards Uffe [1] "mmc: sdhci-msm: Unconditionally call dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table()" https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11752095/
