From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753951AbbAMXpM (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jan 2015 18:45:12 -0500 Received: from utopia.booyaka.com ([74.50.51.50]:49143 "EHLO utopia.booyaka.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752295AbbAMXpK (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jan 2015 18:45:10 -0500 Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 23:45:09 +0000 (UTC) From: Paul Walmsley To: Suman Anna cc: Lokesh Vutla , Roger Quadros , tony@atomide.com, santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com, t-kristo@ti.com, nm@ti.com, nsekhar@ti.com, bcousson@baylibre.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: hwmod: Fix _wait_target_ready() for hwmods without sysc In-Reply-To: <54AC1AFB.4070504@ti.com> Message-ID: References: <1418917790-1791-1-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <5492F84E.7020706@ti.com> <54AA4CD4.40105@ti.com> <54AB9983.1040703@ti.com> <54AC1800.1020406@ti.com> <54AC1AFB.4070504@ti.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Suman On Tue, 6 Jan 2015, Suman Anna wrote: > Looking at your rc3 log @ > http://www.pwsan.com/omap/testlogs/test_v3.19-rc3/20150105224749/boot/4460varsomom/, > I do see a missing reg entry for mailbox, and that's the reason for your > hang because of the missing bail out in your new patch. > > [ 0.261932] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > [ 0.261962] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at > arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c:2458 _init+0x3a0/0x3f0() > [ 0.261962] omap_hwmod: mailbox: doesn't have mpu register target base > ... > ... > [ 0.262329] ---[ end trace a1be72591db4662e ]--- > > Now that said, this is weird, since the reg property for mailbox is > defined in the base omap4.dtsi and should be inherited by the 4460 > VAR-SOM-OM, unless you are booting with an old dtb. Yeah, it doesn't make sense. I'm pretty sure I'm using the right DTB here, since that board is booting with a concatenated uImage + DTB. Well, at least there's a good test platform here. - Paul