Santosh Shilimkar <[email protected]> writes: > On Sunday 11 May 2014 11:55 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: >> * Kevin Hilman <[email protected]> [140509 16:46]: >>> Roger Quadros <[email protected]> writes: >>> >>>> Kevin, >>>> >>>> On 05/09/2014 01:15 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote: >>>>> Tony Lindgren <[email protected]> writes: >>>>> >>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>>> ..but I think I found the cause for recent hangs on panda, just a wild >>>>>> guess based on looking at the recent cpuidle patches after v3.14. >>>>>> >>>>>> Looks like reverting 0b89e9aa2856 (cpuidle: delay enabling interrupts >>>>>> until all coupled CPUs leave idle) makes booting work reliably again >>>>>> on panda. >>>>>> >>>>>> Can you guys confirm, so far no issues here after few boot tests, >>>>>> but it might be too early to tell. >>>>> >>>>> Reverting that makes things a bit more stable, but it still eventually >>>>> fails in the same way. For me it took 8 boots for it to eventually >>>>> fail. >>>>> >>>>> However, if I build with CONFIG_CPU_IDLE=n, it becomes much more stable >>>>> (20+ boots in a row and still going.) >>>>> >>>> >>>> Can you please test with CPU_IDLE enabled but C3 disabled as in below >>>> patch? >>>> It worked for me 10/10 boots. >>> >>> Yup, it worked for me too for 10/10 boots in a row. >> >> But what has caused this regression, does it work reliably with let's >> say v3.13 or v3.12? >> > IIRC things were stable till some CPUIDLE code consolidation happened. > I don't recall exactly but some one did discuss about it a while back. > > Can you re-run your test-cases with patch at end of the email. This > is just a hunch so don't blame me if I waste your time testing the > patch.
With your patch applied on top of next-20140512, my 4460 Panda-ES has booted 25 times in a row, and still going. Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
