Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

Hello, On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 12:34:40AM +0100, André Przywara wrote: > >> If this is a valid use case, we can change devm to repeat till empty > >> but it's a weird thing to do to allocate from a release function. > >> > >> So, something like this. Only compile tested. > > I was wondering if

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

Hello, On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 12:34:40AM +0100, André Przywara wrote: > >> If this is a valid use case, we can change devm to repeat till empty > >> but it's a weird thing to do to allocate from a release function. > >> > >> So, something like this. Only compile tested. > > I was wondering if

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

On 29/04/17 22:28, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 06:03:14PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 10:12:16AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >>> Yeah, so I stack-dumped on the zero allocations and indeed they are >>> called from cleanup functions: >>>

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

On 29/04/17 22:28, Adam Borowski wrote: > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 06:03:14PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 10:12:16AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >>> Yeah, so I stack-dumped on the zero allocations and indeed they are >>> called from cleanup functions: >>>

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 06:03:14PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 10:12:16AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: > > Yeah, so I stack-dumped on the zero allocations and indeed they are > > called from cleanup functions: > > drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c:pinmux_generic_free_functions(): > >

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 06:03:14PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 10:12:16AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: > > Yeah, so I stack-dumped on the zero allocations and indeed they are > > called from cleanup functions: > > drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c:pinmux_generic_free_functions(): > >

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

Hello, On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 10:12:16AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: > Yeah, so I stack-dumped on the zero allocations and indeed they are > called from cleanup functions: > drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c:pinmux_generic_free_functions(): > devm_kzalloc(sizeof(*indices) * pctldev->num_functions,

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

Hello, On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 10:12:16AM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: > Yeah, so I stack-dumped on the zero allocations and indeed they are > called from cleanup functions: > drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c:pinmux_generic_free_functions(): > devm_kzalloc(sizeof(*indices) * pctldev->num_functions,

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

于 2017年4月18日 GMT+08:00 下午3:25:05, Tejun Heo 写到: >Hello, > >On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 12:48:16AM +0100, André Przywara wrote: >> So I see this problem easily now - on every boot - with an unpatched >> 4.11-rc3 kernel and the (arm64) defconfig on a Pine64 or BananaPi >M64. >> I

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

于 2017年4月18日 GMT+08:00 下午3:25:05, Tejun Heo 写到: >Hello, > >On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 12:48:16AM +0100, André Przywara wrote: >> So I see this problem easily now - on every boot - with an unpatched >> 4.11-rc3 kernel and the (arm64) defconfig on a Pine64 or BananaPi >M64. >> I enabled devres.log

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

Hi, On 18/04/17 08:25, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 12:48:16AM +0100, André Przywara wrote: >> So I see this problem easily now - on every boot - with an unpatched >> 4.11-rc3 kernel and the (arm64) defconfig on a Pine64 or BananaPi M64. >> I enabled devres.log and see

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

Hi, On 18/04/17 08:25, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 12:48:16AM +0100, André Przywara wrote: >> So I see this problem easily now - on every boot - with an unpatched >> 4.11-rc3 kernel and the (arm64) defconfig on a Pine64 or BananaPi M64. >> I enabled devres.log and see

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

Hello, On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 12:48:16AM +0100, André Przywara wrote: > So I see this problem easily now - on every boot - with an unpatched > 4.11-rc3 kernel and the (arm64) defconfig on a Pine64 or BananaPi M64. > I enabled devres.log and see that pinctrl probes early, but apparently > gets

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

Hello, On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 12:48:16AM +0100, André Przywara wrote: > So I see this problem easily now - on every boot - with an unpatched > 4.11-rc3 kernel and the (arm64) defconfig on a Pine64 or BananaPi M64. > I enabled devres.log and see that pinctrl probes early, but apparently > gets

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

Hi, On 17/03/17 14:44, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:28:34PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: >>> It's warning that the device has resources associated with it on >>> probe. There gotta be something fishy going on with the probing >>> sequence. How reproducible is the problem? >> >> Do

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

Hi, On 17/03/17 14:44, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:28:34PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: >>> It's warning that the device has resources associated with it on >>> probe. There gotta be something fishy going on with the probing >>> sequence. How reproducible is the problem? >> >> Do

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:44:22AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:28:34PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > > It's warning that the device has resources associated with it on > > > probe. There gotta be something fishy going on with the probing > > > sequence. How reproducible

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:44:22AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:28:34PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > > It's warning that the device has resources associated with it on > > > probe. There gotta be something fishy going on with the probing > > > sequence. How reproducible

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:28:34PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > It's warning that the device has resources associated with it on > > probe. There gotta be something fishy going on with the probing > > sequence. How reproducible is the problem? > > Do you mean in the first probing trial the

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 10:28:34PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > It's warning that the device has resources associated with it on > > probe. There gotta be something fishy going on with the probing > > sequence. How reproducible is the problem? > > Do you mean in the first probing trial the

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

Hello, On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:06:15AM +0900, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > [ 2.895375] platform 1c20800.pinctrl: Retrying from deferred list > > > [ 2.901945] bus: 'platform': driver_probe_device: matched device > > > 1c20800.pinctrl with driver sun50i-a64-pinctrl > > > [ 2.912660] bus:

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

Hello, On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:06:15AM +0900, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > [ 2.895375] platform 1c20800.pinctrl: Retrying from deferred list > > > [ 2.901945] bus: 'platform': driver_probe_device: matched device > > > 1c20800.pinctrl with driver sun50i-a64-pinctrl > > > [ 2.912660] bus:

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:24:38AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > > 16.03.2017, 00:14, "Adam Borowski" : > > Hi! > > On Pine64, since mid-February's -next, I get the following non-fatal > > warning: > > I don't think this is from any bug in sun50i-a64-pinctrl driver, as

Re: sun50i-a64-pinctrl WARN_ON drivers/base/dd.c:349

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:24:38AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > > 16.03.2017, 00:14, "Adam Borowski" : > > Hi! > > On Pine64, since mid-February's -next, I get the following non-fatal > > warning: > > I don't think this is from any bug in sun50i-a64-pinctrl driver, as the PC > even >