From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (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 AB3277C for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2023 10:57:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1676458674; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=MmeJjSh427GKtr5aY1dE1/UGw/jLjAjyH6qeK2RMoAo=; b=dLdgrIexzItBGKrwP+yRmGg7nlc/pOLzkks2orbuVBSrBO8OXhu8GjryuCV/VvwXuJoPR3 YLJ2RLfYiVP1un/Uk2Gu+xx4GYRseU4IrxizhB7wMeHd3UTl46sQUagYM797Sogc2zhcXs zk9vhSwcGhKVPuhW+rWfwzdwFWOuRIc= Received: from mail-ej1-f69.google.com (mail-ej1-f69.google.com [209.85.218.69]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id us-mta-538-jBP7hm8xP8qvmGhfbh-LfQ-1; Wed, 15 Feb 2023 05:57:51 -0500 X-MC-Unique: jBP7hm8xP8qvmGhfbh-LfQ-1 Received: by mail-ej1-f69.google.com with SMTP id ud13-20020a170907c60d00b0088d773d11d6so11941977ejc.17 for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2023 02:57:51 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=MmeJjSh427GKtr5aY1dE1/UGw/jLjAjyH6qeK2RMoAo=; b=7rRFHepmyuzFVVaoyxCENjpfHUGcx9cyKrzdxQdXPKCMi22R3XclS7JcliB0WwO8nK SdVSCul64BElPTHuJWoVCve24u2Fy+p0c6dAmEaOWGqwMiOX6zLabaTVtEQk33iFH6tA gx6e6OU6rr2piZ6GDAddcsyT7+55vgNGt0K61hwAPTgfjE4370d+4nFSdpVJ28Fb7ieE wMVzozqdV1HaD3tvRBEIRAu5Os+eGwMjbZiUNbFfmooExtkJGy837cF2uJ+9vc2i6Hfo sbALkmg0OOnvO/2jNylOz5NShths0pVDCDMcLm5b1lm8eSwBkmpZNgCUQF3ORVcxOTRa m9ZQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKVWaot+7yBsgVeGgauJbUHK5/1N5vzdsr/4ZI+LBnF/iJTNTU1y /cnlGd4gmJlR2XyKowwVDJGgTmPtJArnANMWJtQRjxWv48XsGvyC18sj5365KHjYLhWFDgu1dej gTv3DOVZK30sEOxjUn7rIc+hHnO15EdJfpJuBRn9oegaC X-Received: by 2002:a50:ccc2:0:b0:4ac:bebb:e5fe with SMTP id b2-20020a50ccc2000000b004acbebbe5femr831733edj.1.1676458669786; Wed, 15 Feb 2023 02:57:49 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+nxXB+Yb8YV5YVO81VjVBf4VZDL30eASGa9yuof5vxNU99jL1I3nSh0NSHMQMi9N7zea0BuUiOR9pDqaaa2nw= X-Received: by 2002:a50:ccc2:0:b0:4ac:bebb:e5fe with SMTP id b2-20020a50ccc2000000b004acbebbe5femr831725edj.1.1676458669643; Wed, 15 Feb 2023 02:57:49 -0800 (PST) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: regressions@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230207102254.1446461-1-javierm@redhat.com> <70c01751-1dd7-c4bd-a96e-94dea437aa40@redhat.com> <6f97a117-0d9c-e21b-9adf-50f2233ba9e3@leemhuis.info> In-Reply-To: From: Javier Martinez Canillas Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 11:57:38 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "venus: firmware: Correct non-pix start and end addresses" To: Linux regressions mailing list Cc: Vikash Garodia , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "mka@chromium.org" , Albert Esteve , "stanimir.varbanov@linaro.org" , Enric Balletbo i Serra , Andy Gross , Bjorn Andersson , Konrad Dybcio , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Stanimir Varbanov , "Vikash Garodia (QUIC)" , "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-media@vger.kernel.org" , Fritz Koenig , "Dikshita Agarwal (QUIC)" , "Rajeshwar Kurapaty (QUIC)" X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 11:53 AM Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: > > On 11.02.23 15:27, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: > > On 10.02.23 11:07, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > >> On 2/10/23 10:22, Vikash Garodia wrote: > >> > >>>> So what should we do about this folks? Since not allowing the driver to probe on > >>>> at least SC7180 is a quite serious regression, can we revert for now until a proper > >>>> fix is figured out? > >>> > >>> I am able to repro this issue on sc7180 and discussing with firmware team on the cause > >>> of reset failure. The original patch was raised for fixing rare SMMU faults during warm > >>> boot of video hardware. Hence looking to understand the regressing part before we > >>> proceed to revert. > >> > >> Great, if you are working on a proper fix then that would be much better indeed. > > > > Yeah, that's great, but OTOH: there is almost certainly just one week > > before 6.2 will be released. Ideally this should be fixed by then. > > Vikash, do you think that's in the cards? If not: why not revert this > > now to make sure 6.2 works fine? > > Hmm, no reply. And we meanwhile have Wednesday and 6.2 is almost > certainly going to be out on Sunday. And the problem was called "a quite > serious regression" above. So why not quickly fix this with the revert, > as proposed earlier? > > Vikash? Javier? > I agree with you, that we should land this revert and then properly fix the page fault issue in v6.3. But it's not my call, the v4l2/media folks have to decide that. -- Best regards, Javier Martinez Canillas Core Platforms Red Hat