On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 12:09:21AM +0000, Yoo, Jae Hyun wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Joel Stanley <joel@xxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Monday, March 1, 2021 2:44 PM > > To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; John Wang > > <wangzhiqiang.bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Yoo, Jae Hyun > > <jae.hyun.yoo@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; > > stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Vernon Mauery <vernon.mauery@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; > > Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 055/247] soc: aspeed: snoop: Add clock control logic > > > > On Mon, 1 Mar 2021 at 16:37, Greg Kroah-Hartman > > <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > From: Jae Hyun Yoo <jae.hyun.yoo@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > [ Upstream commit 3f94cf15583be554df7aaa651b8ff8e1b68fbe51 ] > > > > > > If LPC SNOOP driver is registered ahead of lpc-ctrl module, LPC SNOOP > > > block will be enabled without heart beating of LCLK until lpc-ctrl > > > enables the LCLK. This issue causes improper handling on host > > > interrupts when the host sends interrupt in that time frame. > > > Then kernel eventually forcibly disables the interrupt with dumping > > > stack and printing a 'nobody cared this irq' message out. > > > > > > To prevent this issue, all LPC sub-nodes should enable LCLK > > > individually so this patch adds clock control logic into the LPC SNOOP > > > driver. > > > > Jae, John; with this backported do we need to also provide a corresponding > > device tree change for the stable tree, otherwise this driver will no longer > > probe? > > Right. The second patch > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20201208091748.1920-2-wangzhiqiang.bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > John submitted should be applied to stable tree too to make this module be probed > correctly. Now queued up, thanks. greg k-h