On 18/04/2016 21:23, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Peter, Mason, > > On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:29:47 +0200, Mason wrote: >> On 18/04/2016 20:06, Peter Hurley wrote: >> >>> On 04/18/2016 09:24 AM, Mason wrote: >>> >>>> I'm running into this panic. I will take a closer look tomorrow. >>>> Any ideas? >>> >>> commit 8d2acdb9fc3a544ab0442634531834d6007b5467 >>> Author: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@xxxxxxx> >>> Date: Mon Feb 22 09:00:39 2016 +0100 >>> >>> serial: 8250: Add hardware dependency to RT288X option >>> >>> Kconfig option SERIAL_8250_RT288X seems to be only relevant on MIPS >>> platforms, so do not present it on other architectures, unless >>> build-testing. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@xxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Mans Rullgard <mans@xxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@xxxxxxxx> >>> Acked-by: John Crispin <blogic@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> >>> Not sure why Greg picked this up over my objections though > > Greg applied v1 of my patch. In v2 I added ARCH_TANGO as a possible > dependency, but Greg did pick the update. Mason, is your target machine > an ARCH_TANGO machine, or something else? Correct, ARCH_TANGO. http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/arch/arm/mach-tango/Kconfig >> Peter, >> >> Thanks for pointing out the problem. > > Mason, did you check if reverting this commit and re-enabling > SERIAL_8250_RT288X actually solves your problem? I will test tomorrow. But I'm quite confident that enabling SERIAL_8250_RT288X will make the problem go away (see below). >> My ARM-based SoC uses this hardware (Palmchip BK-3103) and it >> now panics on boot. >> >> Can we revert 8d2acdb9fc3a in time for v4.6? > > If not selecting SERIAL_8250_RT288X results in a crash at boot on some > systems, then reverting my commit is not the proper fix. Even after > reverting, you can still omit selecting the option, and get the same > crash. In other words, my commit is not introducing the crash, it must > have been there lurking before. I wanted to have select SERIAL_8250_RT288X if SERIAL_8250 in my platform Kconfig, but Arnd shot that down :-( (What good is a SoC without a console?) http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/444131/focus=444197 "Picking SERIAL_8250 but not SERIAL_8250_RT288X makes the kernel panic. Doesn't that qualify for selecting it?" The problem has existed for a while. > Whatever code crashes in this case should be made more robust to > properly deal with the situation. Or if it is too much work or too ugly > (not being familiar with the code, I have no idea), then we could > finally go with Peter's earlier proposal of dropping the > SERIAL_8250_RT288X option altogether and unconditionally including the > code in question. In fact I think Peter was supposed to send a patch > doing exactly that. Regards. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
