On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 at 12:46, Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org wrote:
On 05-11-20, 11:24, Rob Clark wrote:
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 7:04 PM Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org wrote:
On 03-11-20, 08:50, Rob Clark wrote:
sorry, it didn't apply cleanly (which I guess is due to some other dependencies that need to be picked back to v5.4 product kernel), and due to some other things I'm in middle of debugging I didn't have time yet to switch to v5.10-rc or look at what else needs to cherry-picked..
If you could, pushing a branch with this patch somewhere would be a bit easier to work with (ie. fetch && cherry-pick is easier to deal with than picking things from list)
It has been in linux-next for a few days. Here is the HEAD to pick from. There are few patches there since rc1.
commit 203e29749cc0 ("opp: Allocate the OPP table outside of opp_table_lock")
sorry for the delay, with that cherry-picked, I'm getting a whole lot of:
Ahh, sorry about that and thanks for reporting it. Here is the fix:
diff --git a/drivers/opp/of.c b/drivers/opp/of.c index c718092757d9..6b7f0066942d 100644 --- a/drivers/opp/of.c +++ b/drivers/opp/of.c @@ -112,8 +112,6 @@ static struct opp_table *_find_table_of_opp_np(struct device_node *opp_np) struct opp_table *opp_table; struct device_node *opp_table_np;
lockdep_assert_held(&opp_table_lock);opp_table_np = of_get_parent(opp_np); if (!opp_table_np) goto err;@@ -121,12 +119,15 @@ static struct opp_table *_find_table_of_opp_np(struct device_node *opp_np) /* It is safe to put the node now as all we need now is its address */ of_node_put(opp_table_np);
mutex_lock(&opp_table_lock); list_for_each_entry(opp_table, &opp_tables, node) { if (opp_table_np == opp_table->np) { _get_opp_table_kref(opp_table);mutex_unlock(&opp_table_lock); return opp_table; } }mutex_unlock(&opp_table_lock);err: return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
Ping.