From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2BDE41ADC78; Wed, 16 Apr 2025 16:11:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744819916; cv=none; b=HQkZrNEWsmLk20NhO4/FC9lbUa86+sM7Kvf1dhQs5YLpAI9NwQyvQJw694Xd6EChgFynLodI+VHtMJg5GQLsjpdBcXshujeQ6Yh1+Dq+/FO4YUKzxJoobiR+BqT4ld9Biv0Qvqb8Z8gUWwHvYzkj97X55s3DOcVbq5qNxBlcBLw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744819916; c=relaxed/simple; bh=sWaORZRshemWzFZsKcditOWZrjblebMb5oMGJ741IuE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ntoRcM1uWTB2AxhkaLk7GWdp1nKqAW7QAdS9sFOh03OVwk1yY5v/HYuiI9He6m7iitk3ewpb6RU9Zds5yf4TJZRwx67A83GNoD8gvXKeYW6h/Qs/TmSuQrEyeg4oFYM8vdFWQ1BAOlsvn0kV6HunmlF6+60nDFByTQpURRA78rc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=WJOu70q+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="WJOu70q+" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A4031C4CEE2; Wed, 16 Apr 2025 16:11:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1744819915; bh=sWaORZRshemWzFZsKcditOWZrjblebMb5oMGJ741IuE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=WJOu70q+hUr+FrrsYKfyAYk2FRTygiV3pqZrHh3duEgpxfDeMCiEocwS3ZzGbpGzB ttvf24I0+PRyGcvM2vRAcvD1Fy9qGq1nLXAeTlhDAtFgpvT44uqsuEJSksnk1RL83l YgkEBNcTXkJpDG/O7YEtDJy08ieOYkYqraRntir8y+ApmSslGrTFUTKZaTyqkJToq4 50sadUVwjRZkjILE3URn1slF4omwTnJP1B1kkQ6ZOpeSbMs4IOvgZKpjoJ5+p5Ewzo aVYvKIeUVuXCiMRpTSh0etKXMR+R4CVR77h0/PxxzdNaK98otjOxFSO4S3XyFdH7a8 3whu3KtDMiJAA== Received: from johan by xi.lan with local (Exim 4.97.1) (envelope-from ) id 1u55Mf-000000007Pv-3BLb; Wed, 16 Apr 2025 18:11:54 +0200 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 18:11:53 +0200 From: Johan Hovold To: Cristian Marussi Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, sudeep.holla@arm.com, james.quinlan@broadcom.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org, peng.fan@oss.nxp.com, michal.simek@amd.com, quic_sibis@quicinc.com, dan.carpenter@linaro.org, maz@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] [NOT FOR UPSTREAM] firmware: arm_scmi: quirk: Ignore FC bit in attributes Message-ID: References: <20250415142933.1746249-1-cristian.marussi@arm.com> <20250415142933.1746249-5-cristian.marussi@arm.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250415142933.1746249-5-cristian.marussi@arm.com> On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 03:29:33PM +0100, Cristian Marussi wrote: > Some platform misreported the support of FastChannel when queried: ignore > that bit on selected platforms. > > Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi > --- > Match features has to be set-up properly before upstreaming this. > Ideally the out-of-spec firmware should be matched with a quirk matching > pattern based on Vendor/SubVendor/ImplVersion....but it is NOT clear if the > platform at hand will ship with future fixed firmwares where the ImplVersion > field is properly handled. > If we cannot be sure about that, we should fallback to a compatible match. > > RFC->V1 > - fix QUIRKS conditions This looks good to me now and works as intended after updating the vendor name: Reviewed-by: Johan Hovold Tested-by: Johan Hovold Interestingly, I'm no longer seeing the crash on x1e without the quirk enabled with 6.14 and 6.15-rc2. I still hit it immediately with 6.12 and 6.13 when accessing the cpufreq sysfs attributes (with patch 1/4 applied): [ 30.663577] arm-scmi arm-scmi.0.auto: timed out in resp(caller: do_xfer+0x164/0x564) So presumably something changed in 6.14 that masks the earlier issue when falling back to regular messaging. Any ideas what could have caused this, Sibi? Johan