On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 07:33:54AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > Maxime Ripard <maxime.rip...@free-electrons.com> writes: > > > On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 03:35:50PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> On 05/08/15 03:02, Maxime Ripard wrote: > >> > On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 02:03:57PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> >> On 05/07/15 08:17, Kevin Hilman wrote: > >> >>> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Stephen Boyd <sb...@codeaurora.org> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>>> On 05/01/15 15:07, Heiko Stübner wrote: > >> >>>>> Am Freitag, 1. Mai 2015, 13:52:47 schrieb Stephen Boyd: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Instead I guess we could hook it less deep into clk_get_sys, like > >> >>>>>>> in the > >> >>>>>>> following patch? > >> >>>>>> It looks like it will work at least, but still I'd prefer to keep > >> >>>>>> the > >> >>>>>> orphan check contained to clk.c. How about this compile tested only > >> >>>>>> patch? > >> >>>>> I gave this a spin on my rk3288-firefly board. It still boots, the > >> >>>>> clock tree > >> >>>>> looks the same and it also still defers nicely in the scenario I > >> >>>>> needed it > >> >>>>> for. The implementation also looks nice - and of course much more > >> >>>>> compact than > >> >>>>> my check in two places :-) . I don't know if you want to put this as > >> >>>>> follow-up > >> >>>>> on top or fold it into the original orphan-check, so in any case > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Tested-by: Heiko Stuebner <he...@sntech.de> > >> >>>>> Reviewed-by: Heiko Stuebner <he...@sntech.de> > >> >>>> Thanks. I'm leaning towards tossing your patch 2/2 and replacing it > >> >>>> with > >> >>>> my patch and a note that it's based on an earlier patch from you. > >> >>> It appears this has landed in linux-next in the form of 882667c1fcf1 > >> >>> clk: prevent orphan clocks from being used. A bunch of boot failures > >> >>> for sunxi in today's linux-next[1] were bisected down to that patch. > >> >>> > >> >>> I confirmed that reverting that commit on top of next/master gets > >> >>> sunxi booting again. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >> Thanks for the report. I've removed the two clk orphan patches from > >> >> clk-next. Would it be possible to try with next-20150507 and > >> >> clk_ignore_unused on the command line? > >> > This makes it work, but it's not really an option. > >> > > >> > >> Hmm.. I thought it didn't fix it for Kevin. Confused. > > > > I'm too, but it does fix things here. > > To be more precise on what I tested. I used next-20150507 and tested on > 4 different sunxi platforms. First test was "normal" commandline, > second was with clk_ignore_unused appended: > > - cubie: fail, fail > - cubie2: fail, fail > - bananpi: fail, pass > - cubietruck: fail, pass > > So it seems to have some effect, but by itself, doesn't fix the issue.
It's very odd, I actually tried with a cubie2 here... I'm booting on an initramfs and not MMC though, but I can't see how that can be related to our issue... Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature