Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: 32-bit Amlogic (ARM) SoC: kernel BUG in kfree()
To:     Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
CC:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>, <mhocko@suse.com>,
        <linux@armlinux.org.uk>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <rppt@linux.ibm.com>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
        <linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
References: <CAFBinCBOX8HyY-UocsVQvsnTr4XWXyE9oU+f2xhO1=JU0i_9ow@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190321214401.GC19508@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <CAFBinCA6oK5UhDAt9kva5qRisxr2gxMF26AMK8vC4b1DN5RXrw@mail.gmail.com>
 <5cad2529-8776-687e-58d0-4fb9e2ec59b1@amlogic.com>
 <CAFBinCA=0XSSVmzfTgb4eSiVFr=XRHqLOVFGyK0++XRty6VjnQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <32799846-b8f0-758f-32eb-a9ce435e0b79@amlogic.com>
 <CAFBinCDHmuNZxuDf3pe2ij6m8aX2fho7L+B9ZMaMOo28tPZ62Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <79b81748-8508-414f-c08a-c99cb4ae4b2a@amlogic.com>
 <CAFBinCCSkVGp_iWKf=o=7UGuDUWxyLPGdrqGy_P-HPuEJiU1zQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Liang Yang <liang.yang@amlogic.com>
Message-ID: <8cb108ff-7a72-6db4-660d-33880fcee08a@amlogic.com>
Date:   Wed, 10 Apr 2019 19:08:17 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAFBinCCSkVGp_iWKf=o=7UGuDUWxyLPGdrqGy_P-HPuEJiU1zQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Martin,

On 2019/4/5 12:30, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> Hi Liang,
> 
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 8:44 AM Liang Yang <liang.yang@amlogic.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>> On 2019/3/29 2:03, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>> Hi Liang,
>> [......]
>>>> I don't think it is caused by a different NAND type, but i have followed
>>>> the some test on my GXL platform. we can see the result from the
>>>> attachment. By the way, i don't find any information about this on meson
>>>> NFC datasheet, so i will ask our VLSI.
>>>> Martin, May you reproduce it with the new patch on meson8b platform ? I
>>>> need a more clear and easier compared log like gxl.txt. Thanks.
>>> your gxl.txt is great, finally I can also compare my own results with
>>> something that works for you!
>>> in my results (see attachment) the "DATA_IN  [256 B, force 8-bit]"
>>> instructions result in a different info buffer output.
>>> does this make any sense to you?
>>>
>> I have asked our VLSI designer for explanation or simulation result by
>> an e-mail. Thanks.
> do you have any update on this?
> Sorry. I haven't got reply from VLSI designer yet. We tried to improve 
priority yesterday, but i still can't estimate the time. There is no 
document or change list showing the difference between m8/b and gxl/axg 
serial chips. Now it seems that we can't use command NFC_CMD_N2M on nand 
initialization for m8/b chips and use *read byte from NFC fifo register* 
instead.
> 
> Martin
> 
> .
>