Re: [PATCH v1 0/9] fw_devlink improvements

[Tony Lindgren]

Hi,

* Saravana Kannan <saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx> [220815 18:16]:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 3:33 AM Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > * Saravana Kannan <saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx> [220813 00:45]:
> > > On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 2:49 AM Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > * Saravana Kannan <saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx> [220810 05:54]:
> > > > > Tony,
> > > > >
> > > > > This should handle the odd case of the child being the supplier of the
> > > > > parent. Can you please give this a shot? I want to make sure the cycle
> > > > > detection code handles this properly and treats it like it's NOT a cycle.
> > > >
> > > > Yup, this series works for me, so feel free to add:
> > > >
> > > > Tested-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Thanks for testing!
> > >
> > > Btw, out of curiosity, how many different boards did you test this on?
> > > IIRC you had an issue only in one board, right? Not to say I didn't
> > > break anything else, I'm just trying to see how much confidence we
> > > have on this series so far. I'm hoping the rest of the folks I listed
> > > in the email will get around to testing this series.
> >
> > Sorry if I was not clear earlier. The issue affects several generations
> > of TI 32-bit SoCs at least, not just one board.
> 
> But this series fixes the issues for all of them or are you still
> seeing some broken boot with this series?

Yes. However, I'm now getting confused what exactly you're proposing to fix
the regressions for v6.0-rc series.

I'd like to see just the fixes series for v6.0-rc series. With proper fixes
tags, and possibly reverts.

Then discussing patches for Linux next can be done based on the fixes :)

Regards,

Tony