| Message ID | 1415245232-20585-3-git-send-email-wens@csie.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> writes: > From: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > > With the new factors infrastructure in place, we can unify apb1 and > apb1_mux as a single clock now. > > Signed-off-by: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > [wens@csie.org: Change apb1 node label to "apb1"; reword commit title] > Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> Boot breakage in arm-soc/for-next on sun4i-a10-cubieboard and sun7i-a20-cubieboard2[1] was bisected down to this patch[1]. Reverting $SUBJECT on top of arm-soc gets things booting again. Kevin [1] http://status.armcloud.us/boot/?cubie [2] e883d67285e9267c73f8d2b9d32aa9e712ad00a4 is the first bad commit commit e883d67285e9267c73f8d2b9d32aa9e712ad00a4 Author: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> Date: Thu Nov 6 11:40:30 2014 +0800 ARM: dts: sunxi: unify APB1 clock With the new factors infrastructure in place, we can unify apb1 and apb1_mux as a single clock now. Signed-off-by: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> [wens@csie.org: Change apb1 node label to "apb1"; reword commit title] Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> :040000 040000 ab2fd24827d8610215cfd517106f38f359e39f86 1d836ee4f4a2ff442d7d38829f87b72c32152bcc M arch bisect run success
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 02:04:01PM -0800, Kevin Hilman wrote: > Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> writes: > > > From: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > > > > With the new factors infrastructure in place, we can unify apb1 and > > apb1_mux as a single clock now. > > > > Signed-off-by: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > > [wens@csie.org: Change apb1 node label to "apb1"; reword commit title] > > Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> > > Boot breakage in arm-soc/for-next on sun4i-a10-cubieboard and > sun7i-a20-cubieboard2[1] was bisected down to this patch[1]. > > Reverting $SUBJECT on top of arm-soc gets things booting again. I guess this is because arm-soc's doesn't have linux-next's 93746e70be83a3f113134a16065957b324af50f7 Which also explains why linux-next still boots. Maxime
On Thursday 20 November 2014 14:04:01 Kevin Hilman wrote: > Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> writes: > > > From: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > > > > With the new factors infrastructure in place, we can unify apb1 and > > apb1_mux as a single clock now. > > > > Signed-off-by: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > > [wens@csie.org: Change apb1 node label to "apb1"; reword commit title] > > Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> > > Boot breakage in arm-soc/for-next on sun4i-a10-cubieboard and > sun7i-a20-cubieboard2[1] was bisected down to this patch[1]. > > Reverting $SUBJECT on top of arm-soc gets things booting again. > As this looks like it was intended as a cleanup without functional changes, I would go ahead and revert it in next/dt. Any objections? Arnd
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:57:02PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 20 November 2014 14:04:01 Kevin Hilman wrote: > > Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> writes: > > > > > From: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > > > > > > With the new factors infrastructure in place, we can unify apb1 and > > > apb1_mux as a single clock now. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > > > [wens@csie.org: Change apb1 node label to "apb1"; reword commit title] > > > Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> > > > > Boot breakage in arm-soc/for-next on sun4i-a10-cubieboard and > > sun7i-a20-cubieboard2[1] was bisected down to this patch[1]. > > > > Reverting $SUBJECT on top of arm-soc gets things booting again. > > > > As this looks like it was intended as a cleanup without functional > changes, I would go ahead and revert it in next/dt. > > Any objections? Yeah, you'd break linux-next as well doing so, as the clock driver now requires this from the DT. I can merge it through the clock tree though if you prefer it that way. Maxime
On Friday 21 November 2014 15:29:03 Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:57:02PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Thursday 20 November 2014 14:04:01 Kevin Hilman wrote: > > > Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> writes: > > > > > > > From: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > > > > > > > > With the new factors infrastructure in place, we can unify apb1 and > > > > apb1_mux as a single clock now. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > > > > [wens@csie.org: Change apb1 node label to "apb1"; reword commit title] > > > > Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> > > > > > > Boot breakage in arm-soc/for-next on sun4i-a10-cubieboard and > > > sun7i-a20-cubieboard2[1] was bisected down to this patch[1]. > > > > > > Reverting $SUBJECT on top of arm-soc gets things booting again. > > > > > > > As this looks like it was intended as a cleanup without functional > > changes, I would go ahead and revert it in next/dt. > > > > Any objections? > > Yeah, you'd break linux-next as well doing so, as the clock driver now > requires this from the DT. > > I can merge it through the clock tree though if you prefer it that > way. Do you know why this commit breaks booting then? Arnd
On Friday 21 November 2014 15:35:57 Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 21 November 2014 15:29:03 Maxime Ripard wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:57:02PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Thursday 20 November 2014 14:04:01 Kevin Hilman wrote: > > > > Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> writes: > > > > > > > > > From: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > > > > > > > > > > With the new factors infrastructure in place, we can unify apb1 and > > > > > apb1_mux as a single clock now. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > > > > > [wens@csie.org: Change apb1 node label to "apb1"; reword commit title] > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> > > > > > > > > Boot breakage in arm-soc/for-next on sun4i-a10-cubieboard and > > > > sun7i-a20-cubieboard2[1] was bisected down to this patch[1]. > > > > > > > > Reverting $SUBJECT on top of arm-soc gets things booting again. > > > > > > > > > > As this looks like it was intended as a cleanup without functional > > > changes, I would go ahead and revert it in next/dt. > > > > > > Any objections? > > > > Yeah, you'd break linux-next as well doing so, as the clock driver now > > requires this from the DT. > > > > I can merge it through the clock tree though if you prefer it that > > way. > > Do you know why this commit breaks booting then? > I have now reverted the entire branch, to get things working again. Please send a new pull request once you have a version that you have actually tested. Arnd
Arnd, On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 05:08:08PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 21 November 2014 15:35:57 Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Friday 21 November 2014 15:29:03 Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:57:02PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > On Thursday 20 November 2014 14:04:01 Kevin Hilman wrote: > > > > > Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> writes: > > > > > > > > > > > From: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > > > > > > > > > > > > With the new factors infrastructure in place, we can unify apb1 and > > > > > > apb1_mux as a single clock now. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > > > > > > [wens@csie.org: Change apb1 node label to "apb1"; reword commit title] > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> > > > > > > > > > > Boot breakage in arm-soc/for-next on sun4i-a10-cubieboard and > > > > > sun7i-a20-cubieboard2[1] was bisected down to this patch[1]. > > > > > > > > > > Reverting $SUBJECT on top of arm-soc gets things booting again. > > > > > > > > > > > > > As this looks like it was intended as a cleanup without functional > > > > changes, I would go ahead and revert it in next/dt. > > > > > > > > Any objections? > > > > > > Yeah, you'd break linux-next as well doing so, as the clock driver now > > > requires this from the DT. > > > > > > I can merge it through the clock tree though if you prefer it that > > > way. > > > > Do you know why this commit breaks booting then? > > > > I have now reverted the entire branch, to get things working again. > > Please send a new pull request once you have a version that you > have actually tested. This was tested and working. And again, the linux-next proves it. I know very well why it doesn't work, and it's actually expected: some clock was refactored, the DT needed to be changed, only half of it was merged through arm-soc. It really is just because one part got through arm-soc, the other through the clock tree, nothing more. Maxime
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> writes: > Arnd, > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 05:08:08PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> On Friday 21 November 2014 15:35:57 Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> > On Friday 21 November 2014 15:29:03 Maxime Ripard wrote: >> > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:57:02PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> > > > On Thursday 20 November 2014 14:04:01 Kevin Hilman wrote: >> > > > > Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> writes: >> > > > > >> > > > > > From: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> >> > > > > > >> > > > > > With the new factors infrastructure in place, we can unify apb1 and >> > > > > > apb1_mux as a single clock now. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> >> > > > > > [wens@csie.org: Change apb1 node label to "apb1"; reword commit title] >> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> >> > > > > >> > > > > Boot breakage in arm-soc/for-next on sun4i-a10-cubieboard and >> > > > > sun7i-a20-cubieboard2[1] was bisected down to this patch[1]. >> > > > > >> > > > > Reverting $SUBJECT on top of arm-soc gets things booting again. >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > As this looks like it was intended as a cleanup without functional >> > > > changes, I would go ahead and revert it in next/dt. >> > > > >> > > > Any objections? >> > > >> > > Yeah, you'd break linux-next as well doing so, as the clock driver now >> > > requires this from the DT. >> > > >> > > I can merge it through the clock tree though if you prefer it that >> > > way. >> > >> > Do you know why this commit breaks booting then? >> > >> >> I have now reverted the entire branch, to get things working again. >> >> Please send a new pull request once you have a version that you >> have actually tested. > > This was tested and working. And again, the linux-next proves it. > > I know very well why it doesn't work, and it's actually expected: some > clock was refactored, the DT needed to be changed, only half of it was > merged through arm-soc. > > It really is just because one part got through arm-soc, the other > through the clock tree, nothing more. Which branch (already in linux-next) would be needed in arm-soc/for-next to resolve the dependency? Kevin
Hi Kevin, On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 07:51:40AM -0800, Kevin Hilman wrote: > Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> writes: > > > Arnd, > > > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 05:08:08PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> On Friday 21 November 2014 15:35:57 Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> > On Friday 21 November 2014 15:29:03 Maxime Ripard wrote: > >> > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:57:02PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> > > > On Thursday 20 November 2014 14:04:01 Kevin Hilman wrote: > >> > > > > Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> writes: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > From: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > With the new factors infrastructure in place, we can unify apb1 and > >> > > > > > apb1_mux as a single clock now. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Emilio López <emilio@elopez.com.ar> > >> > > > > > [wens@csie.org: Change apb1 node label to "apb1"; reword commit title] > >> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Boot breakage in arm-soc/for-next on sun4i-a10-cubieboard and > >> > > > > sun7i-a20-cubieboard2[1] was bisected down to this patch[1]. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Reverting $SUBJECT on top of arm-soc gets things booting again. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > As this looks like it was intended as a cleanup without functional > >> > > > changes, I would go ahead and revert it in next/dt. > >> > > > > >> > > > Any objections? > >> > > > >> > > Yeah, you'd break linux-next as well doing so, as the clock driver now > >> > > requires this from the DT. > >> > > > >> > > I can merge it through the clock tree though if you prefer it that > >> > > way. > >> > > >> > Do you know why this commit breaks booting then? > >> > > >> > >> I have now reverted the entire branch, to get things working again. > >> > >> Please send a new pull request once you have a version that you > >> have actually tested. > > > > This was tested and working. And again, the linux-next proves it. > > > > I know very well why it doesn't work, and it's actually expected: some > > clock was refactored, the DT needed to be changed, only half of it was > > merged through arm-soc. > > > > It really is just because one part got through arm-soc, the other > > through the clock tree, nothing more. > > Which branch (already in linux-next) would be needed in arm-soc/for-next > to resolve the dependency? It used to be part of the sunxi/for-next branch I maintain, but the part that would solve it has not been picked up by Mike. You can drop this pull request anyway, I just sent a new one dropping this patch, which will go through the clock tree. Maxime
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-a10.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-a10.dtsi index 380f914..5e2ec2d 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-a10.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-a10.dtsi @@ -174,19 +174,11 @@ "apb0_ir1", "apb0_keypad"; }; - apb1_mux: apb1_mux@01c20058 { - #clock-cells = <0>; - compatible = "allwinner,sun4i-a10-apb1-mux-clk"; - reg = <0x01c20058 0x4>; - clocks = <&osc24M>, <&pll6 1>, <&osc32k>; - clock-output-names = "apb1_mux"; - }; - - apb1: apb1@01c20058 { + apb1: clk@01c20058 { #clock-cells = <0>; compatible = "allwinner,sun4i-a10-apb1-clk"; reg = <0x01c20058 0x4>; - clocks = <&apb1_mux>; + clocks = <&osc24M>, <&pll6 1>, <&osc32k>; clock-output-names = "apb1"; }; diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-a10s.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-a10s.dtsi index 531272c..d2a8514 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-a10s.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-a10s.dtsi @@ -162,19 +162,11 @@ "apb0_ir", "apb0_keypad"; }; - apb1_mux: apb1_mux@01c20058 { - #clock-cells = <0>; - compatible = "allwinner,sun4i-a10-apb1-mux-clk"; - reg = <0x01c20058 0x4>; - clocks = <&osc24M>, <&pll6 1>, <&osc32k>; - clock-output-names = "apb1_mux"; - }; - - apb1: apb1@01c20058 { + apb1: clk@01c20058 { #clock-cells = <0>; compatible = "allwinner,sun4i-a10-apb1-clk"; reg = <0x01c20058 0x4>; - clocks = <&apb1_mux>; + clocks = <&osc24M>, <&pll6 1>, <&osc32k>; clock-output-names = "apb1"; }; diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-a13.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-a13.dtsi index b131068..c35217e 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-a13.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-a13.dtsi @@ -161,19 +161,11 @@ clock-output-names = "apb0_codec", "apb0_pio", "apb0_ir"; }; - apb1_mux: apb1_mux@01c20058 { - #clock-cells = <0>; - compatible = "allwinner,sun4i-a10-apb1-mux-clk"; - reg = <0x01c20058 0x4>; - clocks = <&osc24M>, <&pll6 1>, <&osc32k>; - clock-output-names = "apb1_mux"; - }; - - apb1: apb1@01c20058 { + apb1: clk@01c20058 { #clock-cells = <0>; compatible = "allwinner,sun4i-a10-apb1-clk"; reg = <0x01c20058 0x4>; - clocks = <&apb1_mux>; + clocks = <&osc24M>, <&pll6 1>, <&osc32k>; clock-output-names = "apb1"; }; diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun7i-a20.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun7i-a20.dtsi index 45bb916..8605f2b 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun7i-a20.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun7i-a20.dtsi @@ -222,19 +222,11 @@ "apb0_iis2", "apb0_keypad"; }; - apb1_mux: apb1_mux@01c20058 { - #clock-cells = <0>; - compatible = "allwinner,sun4i-a10-apb1-mux-clk"; - reg = <0x01c20058 0x4>; - clocks = <&osc24M>, <&pll6 1>, <&osc32k>; - clock-output-names = "apb1_mux"; - }; - - apb1: apb1@01c20058 { + apb1: clk@01c20058 { #clock-cells = <0>; compatible = "allwinner,sun4i-a10-apb1-clk"; reg = <0x01c20058 0x4>; - clocks = <&apb1_mux>; + clocks = <&osc24M>, <&pll6 1>, <&osc32k>; clock-output-names = "apb1"; };