Message-ID: <1514566761.28262.7.camel@tsoy.me>
Subject: Re: 4.14.9 with CONFIG_MCORE2 fails to boot
From: Alexander Tsoy <alexander@tsoy.me>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Borislav Petkov <bpetkov@suse.de>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
        Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
        Eduardo Valentin <eduval@amazon.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>, Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, aliguori@amazon.com,
        daniel.gruss@iaik.tugraz.at, hughd@google.com, keescook@google.com,
        Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 19:59:21 +0300
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1712291709170.1899@nanos>
References: <1514453602.6251.8.camel@tsoy.me>
          <20171229091741.GC18441@kroah.com> <1514557888.28262.1.camel@tsoy.me>
         <1514558513.28262.3.camel@tsoy.me>
         <alpine.DEB.2.20.1712291709170.1899@nanos>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 690
Lines: 26

В Пт, 29/12/2017 в 17:11 +0100, Thomas Gleixner пишет:
> On Fri, 29 Dec 2017, Alexander Tsoy wrote:
> > > Just tested Linus's master branch and it have the same problem.
> > > All I
> > > can catch with a serial console is the following:
> > > 
> 
> So for completeness sake:
> 
>        	  MCORE2=y	MCORE2=n
> GCC5.x	  works		works
> GCC6.x	  fail		works
> GCC7.x	  works		works
> 
> Is that correct?
> 

I haven't tested with GCC7.x, but another user reported [1] that it
also fails. So I guess the table should be:

       	  MCORE2=y	MCORE2=n
GCC5.x	  works		works
GCC6.x	  fail		works
GCC7.x	  fail		works

[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/642268#c11