On 04/19/2016 09:13 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Nishanth Menon <n...@ti.com> [160419 05:21]: >> On 04/18/2016 11:37 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> >> + linux-omap, linux-arm >> >>> commit 'ARM: OMAP: Catch callers of revision information prior to it >>> being populated' results in a runtime warning on various non-OMAP >>> architectures. I have seen it with the following qemu tests. >>> >>> arm:vexpress-a9:multi_v7_defconfig:vexpress-v2p-ca9 >>> arm:vexpress-a15:multi_v7_defconfig:vexpress-v2p-ca15-tc1 >>> arm:xilinx-zynq-a9:multi_v7_defconfig:zynq-zc702 >>> arm:xilinx-zynq-a9:multi_v7_defconfig:zynq-zc706 >>> arm:xilinx-zynq-a9:multi_v7_defconfig:zynq-zed >>> arm:midway:multi_v7_defconfig:ecx-2000 >>> arm:smdkc210:multi_v7_defconfig:exynos4210-smdkv310 >>> >>> It is also reported by kernelci.org in at least one boot test for >>> imx6q-cm-fx6. >> >> Thanks for the report... :( > > Oh crap, sorry about that. I'll revert that commit immediately. >
Thanks. Sorry about the same as well.. >>> The warning is as follows. >>> >>> ------------[ cut here ]------------ >>> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c:49 omap_rev+0x3c/0x50 >>> Modules linked in: >>> CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 4.6.0-rc2-next-20160411 #1 >>> Hardware name: SAMSUNG EXYNOS (Flattened Device Tree) >>> [<c030f970>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c030b094>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14) >>> [<c030b094>] (show_stack) from [<c0585424>] (dump_stack+0x84/0xa4) >>> [<c0585424>] (dump_stack) from [<c0341774>] (__warn+0xd4/0x100) >>> [<c0341774>] (__warn) from [<c03417c0>] (warn_slowpath_null+0x20/0x28) >>> [<c03417c0>] (warn_slowpath_null) from [<c0324024>] (omap_rev+0x3c/0x50) >>> [<c0324024>] (omap_rev) from [<c1114a18>] (__omap4_sar_ram_init+0x8/0x88) >>> [<c1114a18>] (__omap4_sar_ram_init) from [<c0301e5c>] >>> (do_one_initcall+0x3c/0x16c) >>> [<c0301e5c>] (do_one_initcall) from [<c1100ccc>] >>> (kernel_init_freeable+0x70/0x1ec) >>> [<c1100ccc>] (kernel_init_freeable) from [<c0b495e4>] >>> (kernel_init+0x8/0x110) >>> [<c0b495e4>] (kernel_init) from [<c0307f78>] (ret_from_fork+0x14/0x3c) >>> ---[ end trace cb88537fdc8fa200 ]--- >>> >>> Please have a look. >> >> Tony, >> Should we get rid of omap_initcall callers(move them into >> board-generic call path or lower the check not to include default of 0? > > Most of those will disappear when we drop the legacy booting support > for omap3. I would not touch those before then to avoid churn with > the legacy code. Sounds good to me. -- Regards, Nishanth Menon
