Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751677AbaKJWMK (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Nov 2014 17:12:10 -0500 Received: from mail-qc0-f170.google.com ([209.85.216.170]:33746 "EHLO mail-qc0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750833AbaKJWMH (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Nov 2014 17:12:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <7hy4riogwt.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> References: <1415342669-30640-1-git-send-email-cernekee@gmail.com> <1415342669-30640-5-git-send-email-cernekee@gmail.com> <7hy4riogwt.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> From: Kevin Cernekee Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 14:11:44 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 04/14] genirq: Generic chip: Add big endian I/O accessors To: Kevin Hilman Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Jason Cooper , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Florian Fainelli , Ralf Baechle , Sergei Shtylyov , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Maxime Bizon , Jonas Gorski , Linux MIPS Mailing List , nicolas.ferre@atmel.com, alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com, Olof Johansson , Arnd Bergmann Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote: > Kevin Cernekee writes: > >> Use io{read,write}32be if the caller specified IRQ_GC_BE_IO when creating >> the irqchip. >> >> Signed-off-by: Kevin Cernekee > > I bisected a couple ARM boot failures in next-20141110 on atmel sama5 platforms down to > this patch, though I'm not quite yet sure how it's causing the failure. > I'm not getting any console output, so haven't been able to dig deeper > yet. Maybe the atmel maintainers (Cc'd) can help dig. > > I've confirmed that reverting $SUBJECT patch (commit > b79055952badbd73710685643bab44104f2509ea2) on top of next-20141110 gets > things booting again. > > Also, it only happens with sama5_defconfig, not with multi_v7_defconfig. In drivers/irqchip/irq-atmel-aic-common.c I see: ret = irq_alloc_domain_generic_chips(domain, 32, 1, name, handle_level_irq, 0, 0, IRQCHIP_SKIP_SET_WAKE); and IRQCHIP_SKIP_SET_WAKE is (1 << 4), same as IRQ_GC_BE_IO. Is it possible that the caller is passing values intended for irq_chip->flags into a function expecting irq_domain_chip_generic->gc_flags ? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/