On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 5:44 AM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 05:26:36AM -0800, Rob Clark wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 4, 2024 at 5:15 AM <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled > > > > > > Revert "interconnect: Teach lockdep about icc_bw_lock order" > > > > > > to the 5.15-stable tree which can be found at: > > > http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary > > > > > > The filename of the patch is: > > > revert-interconnect-teach-lockdep-about-icc_bw_lock-order.patch > > > and it can be found in the queue-5.15 subdirectory. > > > > > > If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree, > > > please let <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> know about it. > > > > > > > > > From 705e471bdd5262d48ca5462efd1292a34d9726b0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > > From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2024 14:12:15 +0100 > > > Subject: Revert "interconnect: Teach lockdep about icc_bw_lock order" > > > > > > From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > This reverts commit e3a29b80e9e6df217dd61c670ac42864fa4a0e67 which is > > > commit 13619170303878e1dae86d9a58b039475c957fcf upstream. > > > > > > It is reported to cause boot crashes in Android systems, so revert it > > > from the stable trees for now. > > > > Sorry, I didn't see the reported crash (could someone link to the > > discussion?), but was it possibly a lockdep splat? Ie. exactly what > > this patch was intended to catch? > > There is no public link, sorry, there was a report that the backport of > these two commits to the stable trees caused a oops at boot time, not a > lockdep splat :( > > I think it is only confined to the LTS branches right now, and have told > the person who reported it to let everyone here know if it is an issue > in 6.6 and newer (that's where these commits came from.) > > So I'm treating this as a "something went wrong with the backport so > let's revert them" for now, until I hear differently. Ahh, an oops would indeed be something different. I'll take a look but for now revert seems ok. BR, -R > thanks, > > greg k-h
