Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755045AbbL3Qxa (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Dec 2015 11:53:30 -0500 Received: from axentia.se ([87.96.186.132]:49939 "EHLO EMAIL.axentia.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753996AbbL3Qx1 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Dec 2015 11:53:27 -0500 From: Peter Rosin To: Russell King - ARM Linux CC: "'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" , "'linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org'" , "nico@fluxnic.net" , Will Deacon , "torvalds@linux-foundation.org" Subject: RE: Domain faults when CONFIG_CPU_SW_DOMAIN_PAN is enabled Thread-Topic: Domain faults when CONFIG_CPU_SW_DOMAIN_PAN is enabled Thread-Index: AQHRM2a+793Els3qRoSjRBiCkZdNQZ7Ei6uQgB9Q2YA= Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 16:51:37 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20151203115143.GM8644@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <533b0f1f264e42e78b94bbff9570fb50@EMAIL.axentia.se> <20151203133727.GN8644@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <94580382ca344ae2b64f66fb778c6ff7@EMAIL.axentia.se> <20151203164118.GR8644@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20151203172708.GT8644@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <45b615420548463ebd1d582bc5da2eff@EMAIL.axentia.se> <20151210002213.GL8644@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <7e60a8ccde1940d68ec4780abe154cbd@EMAIL.axentia.se> <20151210162054.GM8644@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Accept-Language: en-US, sv-SE Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [217.210.101.82] x-gfi-smtp-submission: 1 x-gfi-smtp-hellodomain: EMAIL.axentia.se x-gfi-smtp-remoteip: 192.168.2.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1723 Lines: 43 [I repeat myself just in case my last message disappeared. It would be a shame if 4.4 was also regressed because of a missing response.] I wrote: > Russell King wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 03:29:37PM +0000, Peter Rosin wrote: > > > Russell King wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 09:37:51PM +0000, Peter Rosin wrote: > > > > > I took both patches for a quick spin (a dozen boots and one hour > > > > > uptime after that for each patch) and no incidents. I have not > > > > > gathered data, but the crash on boot feels like it's quite a bit > > > > > above 50% when there is a problem so this feels good (I used 5 > > > > > clean reboots when I bisected and that worked). > > > > > > > > > > Reported-by: Peter Rosin > > > > > Tested-by: Peter Rosin > > > > > > > > > > (and please don't forget to cc stable) > > > > > > > > I've decided to do a more in-depth fix, so that we also solve the > > > > issue that when we schedule in these down_read()s, we don't leak > > > > the permissive domain register setting into the switched-to context. > > > > > > > > Can you test this patch please? Thanks. > > > > > > Still looking good. > > > > Does that mean I can add your reported and tested-by to this latest patch? > > Right, I thought that was obvious, sorry for the confusion. Reported-by: Peter Rosin Tested-by: Peter Rosin (and please don't forget to cc stable) Cheers, Peter -- 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/