[ANN] U-Boot v2022.04-rc1 released
Hey all,
It's release day and so here's v2022.04-rc1. While there's much in here that needed to come in, there's a few big things outstanding, including but not limited to i.MX and layerscape syncs and further sunxi changes.
In terms of a changelog, git log --merges v2022.01..v2022.04-rc1 contains what I've pulled but as always, better PR messages and tags will provide better results here.
So we're now looking at regular releases every other Monday, and with final release on April 4th, 2022. Thanks all!
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 05:59:30PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
Hey all,
It's release day and so here's v2022.04-rc1. While there's much in here that needed to come in, there's a few big things outstanding, including but not limited to i.MX and layerscape syncs and further sunxi changes.
In terms of a changelog, git log --merges v2022.01..v2022.04-rc1 contains what I've pulled but as always, better PR messages and tags will provide better results here.
So we're now looking at regular releases every other Monday, and with final release on April 4th, 2022. Thanks all!
As usual I haven't kept an eye for a while and Edison is completely broken. v2021.10 works, this one doesn't.
The symptoms on all kernels I tried (v5.17-rc3, v5.16, v5.15) is that:
[ 0.852822] PCI host bridge to bus 0000:00 [ 0.853684] pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [io 0x0000-0xffff] [ 0.854680] pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [mem 0x00000000-0xfffffffff] [ 0.855679] pci_bus 0000:00: No busn resource found for root bus, will use [bus 00-ff] [ 0.856700] BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000 [ 0.857666] #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode [ 0.857666] #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page [ 0.857666] PGD 0 P4D 0 [ 0.857666] Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP PTI [ 0.857666] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.15.0+ #23 [ 0.857666] Hardware name: Intel Corporation Merrifield/BODEGA BAY, BIOS 542 2015.01.21:18.19.48 [ 0.857666] RIP: 0010:pci_read+0x47/0x80 ...
Bisection started...
Simon, can you prioritize setting up Edison to make it available for tests?
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 8:31 PM Andy Shevchenko andriy.shevchenko@intel.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 05:59:30PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
Hey all,
It's release day and so here's v2022.04-rc1. While there's much in here that needed to come in, there's a few big things outstanding, including but not limited to i.MX and layerscape syncs and further sunxi changes.
In terms of a changelog, git log --merges v2022.01..v2022.04-rc1 contains what I've pulled but as always, better PR messages and tags will provide better results here.
So we're now looking at regular releases every other Monday, and with final release on April 4th, 2022. Thanks all!
As usual I haven't kept an eye for a while and Edison is completely broken. v2021.10 works, this one doesn't.
The symptoms on all kernels I tried (v5.17-rc3, v5.16, v5.15) is that:
[ 0.852822] PCI host bridge to bus 0000:00 [ 0.853684] pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [io 0x0000-0xffff] [ 0.854680] pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [mem 0x00000000-0xfffffffff] [ 0.855679] pci_bus 0000:00: No busn resource found for root bus, will use [bus 00-ff] [ 0.856700] BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000 [ 0.857666] #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode [ 0.857666] #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page [ 0.857666] PGD 0 P4D 0 [ 0.857666] Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP PTI [ 0.857666] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.15.0+ #23 [ 0.857666] Hardware name: Intel Corporation Merrifield/BODEGA BAY, BIOS 542 2015.01.21:18.19.48 [ 0.857666] RIP: 0010:pci_read+0x47/0x80 ...
Bisection started...
u-boot((379d3c1fd6aa...)|BISECTING)$ git bisect log git bisect start # good: [d637294e264adfeb29f390dfc393106fd4d41b17] Prepare v2022.01 git bisect good d637294e264adfeb29f390dfc393106fd4d41b17 # bad: [df887a045a1d726bbd654ef266e5cbe8cc0c2db3] Prepare v2022.04-rc1 git bisect bad df887a045a1d726bbd654ef266e5cbe8cc0c2db3 # good: [25711b07ca1dcf73dc41b45ca040dadbcff0fa08] Merge tag 'dm-pull-13jan22' of https://source.denx.de/u-boot/c ustodians/u-boot-dm git bisect good 25711b07ca1dcf73dc41b45ca040dadbcff0fa08 # good: [16f4d36c7b8b6aeb0374485acb91afee795ccfc9] arm: dts: rz-g2-beacon-u-boot: Enable pinmux for QSPI git bisect good 16f4d36c7b8b6aeb0374485acb91afee795ccfc9 # bad: [e1b7e4ddb6b1a1d0b416facbd0f576dde9c404e6] binman: Add a bintool implementation for mkimage git bisect bad e1b7e4ddb6b1a1d0b416facbd0f576dde9c404e6 # good: [6146cd62aedc4849fec66f10ab0aa57f1dc64b8e] Merge branch '2022-01-24-assorted-updates' git bisect good 6146cd62aedc4849fec66f10ab0aa57f1dc64b8e # bad: [9d2adca8c3e8d195fa4be5acc8c6dfe14933e826] x86: Move acpi_get_rsdp_addr() ACPI tables to the writer git bisect bad 9d2adca8c3e8d195fa4be5acc8c6dfe14933e826 # good: [31c27eb83084e77921b82e7e631ecd6ae8b904da] x86: Use the ACPI table writer git bisect good 31c27eb83084e77921b82e7e631ecd6ae8b904da # bad: [d953137526cce48002ef1e313592d28b66cc9c48] x86: Move SSDT table to a writer function git bisect bad d953137526cce48002ef1e313592d28b66cc9c48 # good: [eacb6d0ba205cae472c46a974fb16fcd783680b1] x86: Move DSDT table to a writer function git bisect good eacb6d0ba205cae472c46a974fb16fcd783680b1 # good: [138d7ece70e7835ffd120da254af1abdb953e6da] x86: Move FADT table to a writer function git bisect good 138d7ece70e7835ffd120da254af1abdb953e6da # bad: [379d3c1fd6aa490b1ad5697525cfc89b615cf25a] x86: Move FACP table into separate functions git bisect bad 379d3c1fd6aa490b1ad5697525cfc89b615cf25a # first bad commit: [379d3c1fd6aa490b1ad5697525cfc89b615cf25a] x86: Move FACP table into separate functions u-boot((379d3c1fd6aa...)|BISECTING)$
Irony is that I have reviewed it, but that time I was busy and couldn't test.
Simon, can you prioritize setting up Edison to make it available for tests?
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 8:46 PM Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 8:31 PM Andy Shevchenko andriy.shevchenko@intel.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 05:59:30PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
Hey all,
It's release day and so here's v2022.04-rc1. While there's much in here that needed to come in, there's a few big things outstanding, including but not limited to i.MX and layerscape syncs and further sunxi changes.
In terms of a changelog, git log --merges v2022.01..v2022.04-rc1 contains what I've pulled but as always, better PR messages and tags will provide better results here.
So we're now looking at regular releases every other Monday, and with final release on April 4th, 2022. Thanks all!
As usual I haven't kept an eye for a while and Edison is completely broken. v2021.10 works, this one doesn't.
The symptoms on all kernels I tried (v5.17-rc3, v5.16, v5.15) is that:
[ 0.852822] PCI host bridge to bus 0000:00 [ 0.853684] pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [io 0x0000-0xffff] [ 0.854680] pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [mem 0x00000000-0xfffffffff] [ 0.855679] pci_bus 0000:00: No busn resource found for root bus, will use [bus 00-ff] [ 0.856700] BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000 [ 0.857666] #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode [ 0.857666] #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page [ 0.857666] PGD 0 P4D 0 [ 0.857666] Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP PTI [ 0.857666] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.15.0+ #23 [ 0.857666] Hardware name: Intel Corporation Merrifield/BODEGA BAY, BIOS 542 2015.01.21:18.19.48 [ 0.857666] RIP: 0010:pci_read+0x47/0x80 ...
Bisection started...
u-boot((379d3c1fd6aa...)|BISECTING)$ git bisect log git bisect start # good: [d637294e264adfeb29f390dfc393106fd4d41b17] Prepare v2022.01 git bisect good d637294e264adfeb29f390dfc393106fd4d41b17 # bad: [df887a045a1d726bbd654ef266e5cbe8cc0c2db3] Prepare v2022.04-rc1 git bisect bad df887a045a1d726bbd654ef266e5cbe8cc0c2db3 # good: [25711b07ca1dcf73dc41b45ca040dadbcff0fa08] Merge tag 'dm-pull-13jan22' of https://source.denx.de/u-boot/c ustodians/u-boot-dm git bisect good 25711b07ca1dcf73dc41b45ca040dadbcff0fa08 # good: [16f4d36c7b8b6aeb0374485acb91afee795ccfc9] arm: dts: rz-g2-beacon-u-boot: Enable pinmux for QSPI git bisect good 16f4d36c7b8b6aeb0374485acb91afee795ccfc9 # bad: [e1b7e4ddb6b1a1d0b416facbd0f576dde9c404e6] binman: Add a bintool implementation for mkimage git bisect bad e1b7e4ddb6b1a1d0b416facbd0f576dde9c404e6 # good: [6146cd62aedc4849fec66f10ab0aa57f1dc64b8e] Merge branch '2022-01-24-assorted-updates' git bisect good 6146cd62aedc4849fec66f10ab0aa57f1dc64b8e # bad: [9d2adca8c3e8d195fa4be5acc8c6dfe14933e826] x86: Move acpi_get_rsdp_addr() ACPI tables to the writer git bisect bad 9d2adca8c3e8d195fa4be5acc8c6dfe14933e826 # good: [31c27eb83084e77921b82e7e631ecd6ae8b904da] x86: Use the ACPI table writer git bisect good 31c27eb83084e77921b82e7e631ecd6ae8b904da # bad: [d953137526cce48002ef1e313592d28b66cc9c48] x86: Move SSDT table to a writer function git bisect bad d953137526cce48002ef1e313592d28b66cc9c48 # good: [eacb6d0ba205cae472c46a974fb16fcd783680b1] x86: Move DSDT table to a writer function git bisect good eacb6d0ba205cae472c46a974fb16fcd783680b1 # good: [138d7ece70e7835ffd120da254af1abdb953e6da] x86: Move FADT table to a writer function git bisect good 138d7ece70e7835ffd120da254af1abdb953e6da # bad: [379d3c1fd6aa490b1ad5697525cfc89b615cf25a] x86: Move FACP table into separate functions git bisect bad 379d3c1fd6aa490b1ad5697525cfc89b615cf25a # first bad commit: [379d3c1fd6aa490b1ad5697525cfc89b615cf25a] x86: Move FACP table into separate functions u-boot((379d3c1fd6aa...)|BISECTING)$
For the record, these two acpi: Move MCFG implementation to common lib arch: x86: lib: acpi_table: Fix MCFG entries
do not help.
Irony is that I have reviewed it, but that time I was busy and couldn't test.
Simon, can you prioritize setting up Edison to make it available for tests?
So, I'm open to testing any other suggestions.
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 9:15 PM Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 8:46 PM Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 8:31 PM Andy Shevchenko andriy.shevchenko@intel.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 05:59:30PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
...
git bisect bad 379d3c1fd6aa490b1ad5697525cfc89b615cf25a # first bad commit: [379d3c1fd6aa490b1ad5697525cfc89b615cf25a] x86: Move FACP table into separate functions u-boot((379d3c1fd6aa...)|BISECTING)$
For the record, these two acpi: Move MCFG implementation to common lib arch: x86: lib: acpi_table: Fix MCFG entries
do not help.
Irony is that I have reviewed it, but that time I was busy and couldn't test.
Simon, can you prioritize setting up Edison to make it available for tests?
So, I'm open to testing any other suggestions.
Meanwhile I will try to revert and if it works and no other solution comes, I will send it out.
On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 05:02:00PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 9:15 PM Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 8:46 PM Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 8:31 PM Andy Shevchenko andriy.shevchenko@intel.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 05:59:30PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
...
git bisect bad 379d3c1fd6aa490b1ad5697525cfc89b615cf25a # first bad commit: [379d3c1fd6aa490b1ad5697525cfc89b615cf25a] x86: Move FACP table into separate functions u-boot((379d3c1fd6aa...)|BISECTING)$
For the record, these two acpi: Move MCFG implementation to common lib arch: x86: lib: acpi_table: Fix MCFG entries
do not help.
Irony is that I have reviewed it, but that time I was busy and couldn't test.
Simon, can you prioritize setting up Edison to make it available for tests?
So, I'm open to testing any other suggestions.
Meanwhile I will try to revert and if it works and no other solution comes, I will send it out.
Revert has been sent.
Hi Andy,
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 11:28, Andy Shevchenko andriy.shevchenko@intel.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 05:59:30PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
Hey all,
It's release day and so here's v2022.04-rc1. While there's much in here that needed to come in, there's a few big things outstanding, including but not limited to i.MX and layerscape syncs and further sunxi changes.
In terms of a changelog, git log --merges v2022.01..v2022.04-rc1 contains what I've pulled but as always, better PR messages and tags will provide better results here.
So we're now looking at regular releases every other Monday, and with final release on April 4th, 2022. Thanks all!
As usual I haven't kept an eye for a while and Edison is completely broken. v2021.10 works, this one doesn't.
The symptoms on all kernels I tried (v5.17-rc3, v5.16, v5.15) is that:
[ 0.852822] PCI host bridge to bus 0000:00 [ 0.853684] pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [io 0x0000-0xffff] [ 0.854680] pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [mem 0x00000000-0xfffffffff] [ 0.855679] pci_bus 0000:00: No busn resource found for root bus, will use [bus 00-ff] [ 0.856700] BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000000 [ 0.857666] #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode [ 0.857666] #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page [ 0.857666] PGD 0 P4D 0 [ 0.857666] Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP PTI [ 0.857666] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.15.0+ #23 [ 0.857666] Hardware name: Intel Corporation Merrifield/BODEGA BAY, BIOS 542 2015.01.21:18.19.48 [ 0.857666] RIP: 0010:pci_read+0x47/0x80 ...
Bisection started...
Simon, can you prioritize setting up Edison to make it available for tests?
I did have one set up but it broke. I got a second one and made a start, but didn't finish it. Edison has a somewhat painful
FWIW here is my tboot flash script for Edison:
def flash_edison(self, repo): vid = 0x8086 pid = 0xe005 expect = "%04x:%04x" % (vid, pid) self.wait_for_dfu(expect) u_boot = os.path.join(repo._local_str(), "u-boot-edison.img") bindir = self.usbboot_xfstk_dir self.host.exec0( "xfstk-dldr-solo", "--gpflags", "0x80000007", "--osimage", u_boot, "--fwdnx", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_dnx_fwr.bin"), "--fwimage", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_ifwi-dbg-00.bin"), "--osdnx", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_dnx_osr.bin"))
Regards, Simon
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 9:26 PM Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 11:28, Andy Shevchenko andriy.shevchenko@intel.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 05:59:30PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
...
FWIW here is my tboot flash script for Edison:
This is rather unbriking script, DFU (luckily) works
def flash_edison(self, repo): vid = 0x8086 pid = 0xe005 expect = "%04x:%04x" % (vid, pid) self.wait_for_dfu(expect) u_boot = os.path.join(repo._local_str(), "u-boot-edison.img") bindir = self.usbboot_xfstk_dir self.host.exec0( "xfstk-dldr-solo", "--gpflags", "0x80000007", "--osimage", u_boot, "--fwdnx", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_dnx_fwr.bin"), "--fwimage", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_ifwi-dbg-00.bin"), "--osdnx", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_dnx_osr.bin"))
To the topic, any suggestions on how to fix the current U-Boot regression?
Hi Andy,
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 12:29, Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 9:26 PM Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 11:28, Andy Shevchenko andriy.shevchenko@intel.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 05:59:30PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
...
FWIW here is my tboot flash script for Edison:
This is rather unbriking script, DFU (luckily) works
Not if it is bricked: :-) I need something that always works.
def flash_edison(self, repo): vid = 0x8086 pid = 0xe005 expect = "%04x:%04x" % (vid, pid) self.wait_for_dfu(expect) u_boot = os.path.join(repo._local_str(), "u-boot-edison.img") bindir = self.usbboot_xfstk_dir self.host.exec0( "xfstk-dldr-solo", "--gpflags", "0x80000007", "--osimage", u_boot, "--fwdnx", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_dnx_fwr.bin"), "--fwimage", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_ifwi-dbg-00.bin"), "--osdnx", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_dnx_osr.bin"))To the topic, any suggestions on how to fix the current U-Boot regression?
The easiest thing is to use 'acpi list' and 'acpi dump facp' etc. to see what is different between the two commits. My testing was on coral and minnowmax and I must have missed it. We don't actually have any test coverage on the board-specific code.
Regards, SImon
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 12:31:46PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 12:29, Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 9:26 PM Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 11:28, Andy Shevchenko andriy.shevchenko@intel.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 05:59:30PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
...
FWIW here is my tboot flash script for Edison:
This is rather unbriking script, DFU (luckily) works
Not if it is bricked: :-) I need something that always works.
def flash_edison(self, repo): vid = 0x8086 pid = 0xe005 expect = "%04x:%04x" % (vid, pid) self.wait_for_dfu(expect) u_boot = os.path.join(repo._local_str(), "u-boot-edison.img") bindir = self.usbboot_xfstk_dir self.host.exec0( "xfstk-dldr-solo", "--gpflags", "0x80000007", "--osimage", u_boot, "--fwdnx", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_dnx_fwr.bin"), "--fwimage", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_ifwi-dbg-00.bin"), "--osdnx", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_dnx_osr.bin"))To the topic, any suggestions on how to fix the current U-Boot regression?
The easiest thing is to use 'acpi list' and 'acpi dump facp' etc. to see what is different between the two commits. My testing was on coral and minnowmax and I must have missed it. We don't actually have any test coverage on the board-specific code.
=> acpi dump facp Table 'FACP' not found
This explains I believe everything.
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 09:47:52PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 12:31:46PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 12:29, Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 9:26 PM Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 11:28, Andy Shevchenko andriy.shevchenko@intel.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 05:59:30PM -0500, Tom Rini wrote:
...
FWIW here is my tboot flash script for Edison:
This is rather unbriking script, DFU (luckily) works
Not if it is bricked: :-) I need something that always works.
def flash_edison(self, repo): vid = 0x8086 pid = 0xe005 expect = "%04x:%04x" % (vid, pid) self.wait_for_dfu(expect) u_boot = os.path.join(repo._local_str(), "u-boot-edison.img") bindir = self.usbboot_xfstk_dir self.host.exec0( "xfstk-dldr-solo", "--gpflags", "0x80000007", "--osimage", u_boot, "--fwdnx", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_dnx_fwr.bin"), "--fwimage", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_ifwi-dbg-00.bin"), "--osdnx", os.path.join(bindir, "edison_dnx_osr.bin"))To the topic, any suggestions on how to fix the current U-Boot regression?
The easiest thing is to use 'acpi list' and 'acpi dump facp' etc. to see what is different between the two commits. My testing was on coral and minnowmax and I must have missed it. We don't actually have any test coverage on the board-specific code.
=> acpi dump facp Table 'FACP' not found
This explains I believe everything.
Side question(s):
- Why out of a sudden different name here:
ACPI_WRITER(5fadt, "FACS", apl_write_fadt, 0);
FACS vs FACP
- Why do you need double assignment of the same revision in acpi_fadt_common()
header->revision = 4; ... /* Use ACPI 3.0 revision */ fadt->header.revision = 4;
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 09:47:52PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 12:31:46PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 12:29, Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 9:26 PM Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
...
To the topic, any suggestions on how to fix the current U-Boot regression?
The easiest thing is to use 'acpi list' and 'acpi dump facp' etc. to see what is different between the two commits. My testing was on coral and minnowmax and I must have missed it. We don't actually have any test coverage on the board-specific code.
=> acpi dump facp Table 'FACP' not found
This explains I believe everything.
So, how is this ACPI_WRITER() supposed to work? Any documentation, please?
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 09:54:38PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 09:47:52PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 12:31:46PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 12:29, Andy Shevchenko andy.shevchenko@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 9:26 PM Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
...
To the topic, any suggestions on how to fix the current U-Boot regression?
The easiest thing is to use 'acpi list' and 'acpi dump facp' etc. to see what is different between the two commits. My testing was on coral and minnowmax and I must have missed it. We don't actually have any test coverage on the board-specific code.
=> acpi dump facp Table 'FACP' not found
This explains I believe everything.
So, how is this ACPI_WRITER() supposed to work? Any documentation, please?
So. what's news here, please?
Hi,
On 1/31/22 23:59, Tom Rini wrote:
Hey all,
It's release day and so here's v2022.04-rc1. While there's much in here that needed to come in, there's a few big things outstanding, including but not limited to i.MX and layerscape syncs and further sunxi changes.
In terms of a changelog, git log --merges v2022.01..v2022.04-rc1 contains what I've pulled but as always, better PR messages and tags will provide better results here.
So we're now looking at regular releases every other Monday, and with final release on April 4th, 2022. Thanks all!
I also found that this patch break ZynqMP boards. I didn't have a time to dig into it more. Just did a bisect to find out what's going on. 985503439762 ("fdt: Don't call board_fdt_blob_setup() without OF_BOARD")
Thanks, Michal
participants (5)
-
Andy Shevchenko -
Andy Shevchenko -
Michal Simek -
Simon Glass -
Tom Rini