Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-91055-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2024 18:04:29 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>, x86@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: x86 boot issues in -next
Message-ID: <f2dc0a62-f9b0-41e7-8e13-d81887fc1f48@sirena.org.uk>
References: <05a45cc8-e0fc-422e-80d2-596ed63202a3@sirena.org.uk>
 <71f9b0b7-190f-453c-b55b-c842db4a825d@intel.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="i0qNiEXbJs1qiWn9"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <71f9b0b7-190f-453c-b55b-c842db4a825d@intel.com>


--i0qNiEXbJs1qiWn9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 01:48:41PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 3/1/24 13:29, Mark Brown wrote:

> > For the past few days -next has been failing to boot an x86_64 defconfig
> > on the x86 machine Linaro has available in their lab.  DMI says it's a
> > "Dell Inc. PowerEdge R200/0TY019, BIOS 1.4.3 05/15/2009" and the CPU is
> > described as "Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X3220  @ 2.40GHz (family: 0x6, model:
> > 0xf, stepping: 0xb)", it's running happily with mainline and
> > pending-fixes.

> This wouldn't explain the bisect results, but there's been a crash fixed
> in here:

> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/170863445442.1479840.1818801787239831650.stgit@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com/

> that looks pretty similar to your signature.

> Could you give Dan's patch a shot?

Whatever the issue was it's gone today - Dan's patch is in -next so I'm
guessing it may well have been it.  I'm guessing the bisection might've
been due to some combination of the two trees causing an empty group to
get added?  Thanks for looking into it.

--i0qNiEXbJs1qiWn9
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAmXmDS0ACgkQJNaLcl1U
h9Cmzgf/Um8ZI9/CArhfn8sgMoPIAh3/Q//gEUzaWU8T7eWm3cKqdogEMQOf1OMZ
bwm4nCcp+ltmZsid6wJrOSIbuyiWpi15gKkPgfA6l5oNHRg+BJGzmmC6g952mg1s
PQ7HTMBS3nrtRJhCOxNqh/eX58tsUmJGPcc6GSolgwJ26e/ctzAUpKU95dTwDtOZ
/TxJ8St/K7FzSs+eLHIYF7/0/W4xDvZ3SvX+kz5dXPEf5UqQjJa31QhjPNk18vxS
ABzSCR+mXsdT7oBZjLFkcS9Jqox1YKOho6cRJRlZFKuGj81SKg72G1tUd6oNhVAq
5FRYhwgaaXDvYv6+i19XF4SYlm7ssQ==
=FRnd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--i0qNiEXbJs1qiWn9--