From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE4B34F889; Thu, 28 Mar 2024 06:51:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711608692; cv=none; b=iDwCa9CVbvPT3hnp/DLeWflRSD6JWPKlNfEwnL80dwUPoGlcde4KPiUepJRReV8cSib8rhh6dBfJJ1mnj4A8l18SI70qnIRDdX6kmUfVv1lTpzFbFgeBCT4syiKz9WWz0CLLhG/BPkyPqUa2SpY5eOfHZhCrgQNAiX1qajpmrF0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711608692; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LIDoAU5YVIxdpGw5qxykbilLNFof0t4byLQ0YDnjk58=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ulYYhOUD79+r467zLvW+5eHelO+GB/3wKX+EUFYKy475Ogf4Wj0sUstjepEEI1TMyANcBTLe8HpxWfdZOTdyFQYljC7Wkbvdm03GSn3vhczwOl2kcVGfIRaj/UvIgRbDlmZ7JuPzVksWX25Udv0FJ6hAAsBnFIzZi/cnP7rk6CQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=DUs/Eaw+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="DUs/Eaw+" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EDE52C433F1; Thu, 28 Mar 2024 06:51:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1711608691; bh=LIDoAU5YVIxdpGw5qxykbilLNFof0t4byLQ0YDnjk58=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=DUs/Eaw+N4AwggWOeEtrI6Y1nrWJvaS1iuv+3LHFcXD4DUiCX3rIc2uITA+DXZPPm ECVDRpq9cV7tNlC7HPfcMfI/sA7v6Xcm2RTCWfxQxeNT6ZUPZCcRBILnfXv+5/t2ZE IyltIgBcWuY42pRbwQv6meEl7tCERg05/I6ykZgIspWukeeVwQaYL89u5jvZz2/cPx u76V9Jwab7ZeW3vPwhmXiF2Er4T9CRUrz/3Jp1auWN+1hiV03z/pz8Cgz8BZPC15rk yJzYdvy5YeZpDGQp/6DR0NZuoY8fxSIngrEzKqejqcwL3NgKyST5mAVGpzd2aFAW4h i/3Vzn5A45LRA== Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 12:21:26 +0530 From: Vinod Koul To: Linux regressions mailing list Cc: dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, parthiban@linumiz.com, saravanan@linumiz.com, 'karthikeyan' , "bumyong.lee" Subject: Re: dmaengine: CPU stalls while loading bluetooth module Message-ID: References: <1553a526-6f28-4a68-88a8-f35bd22d9894@linumiz.com> <000001da6ecc$adb25420$0916fc60$@samsung.com> <12de921e-ae42-4eb3-a61a-dadc6cd640b8@leemhuis.info> <000001da7140$6a0f1570$3e2d4050$@samsung.com> <07b0c5f6-1fe2-474e-a312-5eb85a14a5c8@leemhuis.info> <001001da7a60$78603130$69209390$@samsung.com> <9490757c-4d7c-4d8b-97e2-812a237f902b@leemhuis.info> <8734a80b-c7a9-4cc2-91c9-123b391d468c@leemhuis.info> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: regressions@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8734a80b-c7a9-4cc2-91c9-123b391d468c@leemhuis.info> On 26-03-24, 14:50, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: > Hi, Thorsten here, the Linux kernel's regression tracker. Top-posting > for once, to make this easily accessible to everyone. > > Vinod Koul, what's your option here? We have two reports about > regressions caused by 22a9d958581244 ("dmaengine: pl330: issue_pending > waits until WFP state") [v6.8-rc1] now: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1553a526-6f28-4a68-88a8-f35bd22d9894@linumiz.com/ > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZYhQ2-OnjDgoqjvt@wens.tw/ > [the first link points to the start of this thread] > > To me it sounds like this is a change that better should be reverted, > but you are of course the better judge here. Sure I have reverted this, so original issue exist as is now... > > Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat) > > On 20.03.24 07:28, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: > > On 20.03.24 01:49, bumyong.lee wrote: > >>>>> Hmmm. 6.8 final is due. Is that something we can live with? Or would > >>>>> it be a good idea to revert above commit for now and reapply it when > >>>>> something better emerged? I doubt that the answer is "yes, let's do > >>>>> that", but I have to ask. > >>>> > >>>> I couldn't find better way now. > >>>> I think it's better to follow you mentioned > >>> > >>> 6.8 is out, but that issue afaics was not resolved, so allow me to ask: > >>> did "submit a revert" fell through the cracks or is there some other > >>> solution in the works? Or am I missing something? > >> > >> "submit a revert" would fix the issue. but it would make another issue > >> that the errata[1] 719340 described. > > > > "Make" as it "that other issue was present before the culprit was > > applied"? Then that other issue does not matter due to the "no > > regression" rule and how Linus afaics wants to see it applied in > > practice. For details on the latter, see the quotes from him here: > > https://docs.kernel.org/process/handling-regressions.html > > Hence please submit a revert (or tell me if I misunderstood something) > > -- or of course a workaround for the other issue that does not cause the > > regression people reported. > > > >> [...] > >> [1]: https://developer.arm.com/documentation/genc008428/latest > > > > Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat) > > -- > > Everything you wanna know about Linux kernel regression tracking: > > https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/about/#tldr > > If I did something stupid, please tell me, as explained on that page. > > > > > -- > Everything you wanna know about Linux kernel regression tracking: > https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/about/#tldr > If I did something stupid, please tell me, as explained on that page. > > #regzbot poke -- ~Vinod