From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail11.truemail.it (mail11.truemail.it [217.194.8.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC0CD237164; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 10:21:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.194.8.81 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746008503; cv=none; b=lmQmvpuy3sYh30t0IpiAWQC/+0AhYPU3+Q/h2gWKdJv2v8or86u5r9M6lJZaxcewlHLjYLv/e5fBnfT4ymLMneRIGY3epYcaXasYfzguR5sgI6H3hq/Uhi9U9wmdjZpUdSzYJsTUVgqNuRYgph/HGKYLX8/KvnkMGVmq15p37aM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746008503; c=relaxed/simple; bh=CLIfvubB/B/OHg0nRihEh8GRi3rzx1utm1UTR2IFe/Y=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=sQ2eiM95VWBGlsQ5KNGWiXxVz2goRP+YCd2jgDZoHr6ek88+vxnWN/5A0LIss/ZJ8C6MkqvpMUF4Flz9LTFMMeH3fE8FX05wg6FaAi8j90crJwymFgNgP3OcazVHtcCQz8b3Hq2BRLP2g6RNzL6KvpNjFqaWO70Y06eySe7UcxE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=dolcini.it; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dolcini.it; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dolcini.it header.i=@dolcini.it header.b=JxzaPl7R; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.194.8.81 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=dolcini.it Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dolcini.it Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dolcini.it header.i=@dolcini.it header.b="JxzaPl7R" Received: from gaggiata.pivistrello.it (93-49-2-63.ip317.fastwebnet.it [93.49.2.63]) by mail11.truemail.it (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C89AF1F997; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 12:21:39 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dolcini.it; s=default; t=1746008499; bh=5DaHQT4Qjk3BDVTDz4Bb4NNHE0GPIz71ATKW0qH/aBY=; h=Received:From:To:Subject; b=JxzaPl7RKrpB0llXa5Yy3AtfyvduS+RlpsdYVdEWBPaBh0HNBWiJnSy5NtGqxZ9HL bFsNPtQpXkF5MDO5s0KH/lzNrwDYkuZ/7PRcseFY70IpgkTZr39v3gfIyfRUQkCBUf 9d2OQXqD+hhgnwjGhc4WkwwStEiPFgHIGpTebx5zth0sxGIndJ5EbSnpIhtnbPWDqm MEjRFdey2H0RqWncNAWqBTObiLYL33ZmZu0rz3RIOXvgLm8owaKW5RZW37kdnpGAaN x6a7MXociRmsTFUN45QNkwkwOXmfsBazfWyth1e7/6FNideUAw1mmxLy9ioXj+wy8h zSDmnxBXkpYJQ== Received: by gaggiata.pivistrello.it (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7AAF67F84D; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 12:21:39 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 12:21:39 +0200 From: Francesco Dolcini To: Francesco Dolcini Cc: Andreas Kemnade , Jerome Neanne , Shree Ramamoorthy , Mark Brown , Nishanth Menon , Vignesh Raghavendra , Tero Kristo , Aaro Koskinen , Kevin Hilman , Roger Quadros , Tony Lindgren , Liam Girdwood , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: tps65219/am62p kernel oops Message-ID: References: <20250429185240.6a7644bf@akair> <20250430080109.GA65078@francesco-nb> 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: <20250430080109.GA65078@francesco-nb> On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 10:01:14AM +0200, Francesco Dolcini wrote: > On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 06:52:40PM +0200, Andreas Kemnade wrote: > > Am Tue, 29 Apr 2025 15:21:19 +0200 > > schrieb Francesco Dolcini : > > > > > Hello all, > > > while working on adding support in mainline for a new board based on TI > > > AM62P SoC I noticed the following Kernel Oops. > > > > > > This oops was reproduced running current Linux > > > master, 6.15.0-rc4+, ca91b9500108d4cf083a635c2e11c884d5dd20ea, but I was able > > > to reproduce the same with 6.14.4. > > > > > > > [...] > > > [ +0.000022] Call trace: > > > [ +0.000011] regulator_notifier_call_chain+0x20/0xa4 (P) > > > [ +0.000018] tps65219_regulator_irq_handler+0x34/0x80 > > > > wild guessing: maybe because irqdata->rdev is not initalized in > > _probe()? At least I do not see where it would be initialized. > > your wild guess seems correct, I'll send a proper patch with your > suggested-by after doing a couple of more tests, thanks. so, the bug is clear, however the fix is not an obvious one liner as I was wishing. we would need to add a link from each of the interrupts to the specific regulator. as of now such a connection is not existing in the code. I would not have the time to fix the code in the next few days, if someone is able to pick this up before, just let me know ... Francesco