From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12358C433B4 for ; Wed, 12 May 2021 12:44:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD690613CA for ; Wed, 12 May 2021 12:44:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233160AbhELMp3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 May 2021 08:45:29 -0400 Received: from mx07-00178001.pphosted.com ([185.132.182.106]:22792 "EHLO mx07-00178001.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233182AbhELMp3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 May 2021 08:45:29 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0046668.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx07-00178001.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 14CCc9HY007980; Wed, 12 May 2021 14:44:06 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=foss.st.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=selector1; bh=Sdiz04I1eZ4tZNAdMz6Zqee8SEhTjRnafOqx+r8AJxY=; b=HLKFvyBumNJb2ATy5rSpigSmr8Bk4cQCx02DFapETO0C4tgDsbEDZ6xYytTyxhOTBRjw PvGUA5ivmmriLjiuXNhOPI3cy/wTiIskzzABnCdjJmLTRv7h4Bze5jBCYpZxUJqUog5J d+DXBPrcZxQySJ7Zqxe+2pIutK35/9hdkCq28XOTGW++PjBuxL9sBTq4an8tN4vPGf90 Z3LE35rwNhPeCSoZWcRO2UrqTtZS3zWLgT/5iWRjKPuJxwj9lufEdiKIyGBZIy+/4uQG 7C/9N/sqgjN+JZKSvalbDPqJ356oXzFHhe+LbuKlTGsT0HlWW808g28pN/mhkWSaLZV9 Jw== Received: from beta.dmz-eu.st.com (beta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.1.35]) by mx07-00178001.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 38g3jabsk2-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 12 May 2021 14:44:06 +0200 Received: from euls16034.sgp.st.com (euls16034.sgp.st.com [10.75.44.20]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 210E810002A; Wed, 12 May 2021 14:44:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from Webmail-eu.st.com (sfhdag2node3.st.com [10.75.127.6]) by euls16034.sgp.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id DD70E221F7D; Wed, 12 May 2021 14:44:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lmecxl0912.lme.st.com (10.75.127.51) by SFHDAG2NODE3.st.com (10.75.127.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 12 May 2021 14:44:04 +0200 Subject: Re: [v5.4 stable] arm: stm32: Regression observed on "no-map" reserved memory region To: Quentin Perret CC: Florian Fainelli , Ard Biesheuvel , Rob Herring , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Sasha Levin , stable , Arnd Bergmann , "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Nicolas Boichat , Stephen Boyd , KarimAllah Ahmed , Android Kernel Team , Architecture Mailman List , Frank Rowand , linux-arm-kernel References: <001f8550-b625-17d2-85a6-98a483557c70@foss.st.com> From: Alexandre TORGUE Message-ID: <2f384c1f-e897-e458-4562-8a7c0bd338e1@foss.st.com> Date: Wed, 12 May 2021 14:44:04 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.75.127.51] X-ClientProxiedBy: SFHDAG2NODE1.st.com (10.75.127.4) To SFHDAG2NODE3.st.com (10.75.127.6) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391,18.0.761 definitions=2021-05-12_06:2021-05-12,2021-05-12 signatures=0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 5/12/21 2:34 PM, Quentin Perret wrote: > On Wednesday 12 May 2021 at 12:55:53 (+0200), Alexandre TORGUE wrote: >> We saw that patches [1] and [2] cause issue on stable version (at least for >> 5.4). As you said issue can be seen with above device tree and check in >> /proc/iomem than gpu_reserved region is taken by the kernel as "System RAM". >> >> On v5.10 stream there are no issues seen taking patches [1]&[2] and the >> reason is linked to patches [3]&[4] which have been introduced in v5.10.0. >> Reverting them give me the same behavior than on stable version. > > Thanks for confirming. Given that the patches were not really fixes, I > think reverting is still the best option. I've sent reverts to -stable > for 5.4 and prior: > > https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20210512122853.3243417-1-qperret@google.com/ > Thanks Quentin. alex > Cheers, > Quentin >