Messages in this thread | | | From | <> | Subject | Re: Regression: memory corruption on Atmel SAMA5D31 | Date | Mon, 27 Jun 2022 12:26:39 +0000 |
| |
On 6/21/22 13:46, Peter Rosin wrote: > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe > > 2022-06-20 at 16:22, Tudor.Ambarus@microchip.com wrote: >> >>> >>> git@github.com:ambarus/linux-0day.git, branch dma-regression-hdmac-v5.18-rc7-4th-attempt >>> >> >> Hi, Peter, >> >> I've just forced pushed on this branch, I had a typo somewhere and with that fixed I could >> no longer reproduce the bug. Tested for ~20 minutes. Would you please test last 3 patches >> and tell me if you can still reproduce the bug? > > Hi! > > I rebased your patches onto my current branch which is v5.18.2 plus a few unrelated > changes (at least they are unrelated after removing the previous workaround to disable > nand-dma entirely). > > The unrelated patches are two backports so that drivers recognize new compatibles [1][2], > which should be completely harmless, plus a couple of proposed fixes that happens to fix > eeprom issues with the at91 I2C driver from Codrin Ciubotariu [3]. > > On that kernel, I can still reproduce. It seems a bit harder to reproduce the problem now > though. If the system is otherwise idle, the sha256sum test did not reproduce in a run of > 150+ attempts, but if I let the "real" application run while I do the test, I get a failure rate > of about 10%, see below. The real application burns some CPU (but not all of it) and > communicates with HW using I2C, native UARTs and two of the four USB-serial ports > (FTDI, with the latency set to 1ms as mentioned earlier), so I guess there is more DMA > pressure or something? There is a 100mbps network connection, but it was left "idle" > during this test. >
Thanks, Peter. I got back to the office, I'm rechecking what could go wrong.
ta
| |