From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCD5F69945; Fri, 9 Feb 2024 10:20:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.123.25 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707474046; cv=none; b=Efr7guqWOPNGYq8WwP+xT5zzcFqmLUqTPO3J+XKeEzX4HzC/ax6MRAE83BiEnmjQUnxWc4hjzWGqu/yqYRFxF98L0M7wnAeAXAvzTJQFRwnDlNtToBm5sHg4TCpllR8mYewfuvKsbH7u0IpiN/PkzBj+6VkxyujyVbMGaYYwEos= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707474046; c=relaxed/simple; bh=BdP/gbWV69W+twjGklu0gw6zUZWOu0HNNni9y/moC5M=; h=MIME-Version:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From:To:Cc: Subject:Content-Type; b=N4HWXyj+EUxfDn7txnBRsbOet3ybVNTJCiQrRXlpI5cNfRHUEk//ranRcU6WXAq6XejvVVfaUeqDGUMSMWWzGfwrRQw0tKpHNcaFFG5NxsL//HYJDwDndQm7sZd+BTymgq954rN2VUZSsXyYwWA9ZL2Z18XAF7SFy2ApoFtAESo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arndb.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arndb.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=arndb.de header.i=@arndb.de header.b=LWxD6VlS; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=yd6vhEgV; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.123.25 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arndb.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arndb.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=arndb.de header.i=@arndb.de header.b="LWxD6VlS"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="yd6vhEgV" Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 163973200AE6; Fri, 9 Feb 2024 05:20:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from imap51 ([10.202.2.101]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 09 Feb 2024 05:20:44 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=arndb.de; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1707474042; x=1707560442; bh=YlVp2fVc8I bNSfuq3P/i0hjvzDSLwhQ0RUOswf2KtYw=; b=LWxD6VlSDU4ez/liiq0KuV5G6q u99IgdZTexpekpxRF6qjWTriZNxCiU2V6951LW2waftVqpbU8nN7Lb/F605PkAMH 59AXRHBdqlLGf0MJuF4vyHdIowy2h4c7yJ9y1txuDvqYa56els0EQ6qYGG6zVuH8 SGzzoyDgJqumksvBa4Jpwq6nOtRLFf74ErFPlK9VnxuFhGYhGcZ01JgxycdOxyrz +taz9FdSN+y4t7I00uolcfOHHkqg+fOBSD1bRWRmC2GPnczh+EWJ2QViWGBXeSDa BfiJqC7cFRLRRLMmOZHVWfdhpbmXJJDjrKS31OApw3Xiw1hY69usx3NPg16A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm3; t=1707474042; x=1707560442; bh=YlVp2fVc8IbNSfuq3P/i0hjvzDSL whQ0RUOswf2KtYw=; b=yd6vhEgVQfwVOMQdcqVsi2WSKFS5mukIyZjef0VdmnJE rrS+uO9xw8mAiTQEwM0lA7SDm1/HsYFuRaQFXHe3cIy6yBYGTkaugU2Ef/nbT6mD jejlTP3OwZz5cv69FARst5Wm/TZMBC6eYldxbZxc9jUDhcKe0+GhlAoRGMmBKEf/ 7CuFX9AU2X5JRVFn/dR2xQ/pdK40d+VxMTCRE3pFNDc1RMWVhsDpBKqWEtviBKCH 1sE+ciN/qpCxyfguchgKxJTLspjef8z+lo7uPPZh1r+oIRLQy9JAGWU+RzZGdqO+ Fpsb+PdGu0n3rVX6hVPaIyHFI8E2/RmkyGje7htAYA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvledrtdeigddugecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvvefutgesthdtredtreertdenucfhrhhomhepfdetrhhn ugcuuegvrhhgmhgrnhhnfdcuoegrrhhnugesrghrnhgusgdruggvqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeffheeugeetiefhgeethfejgfdtuefggeejleehjeeutefhfeeggefhkedtkeet ffenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegrrh hnugesrghrnhgusgdruggv X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i56a14606:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 0D6C0B6008F; Fri, 9 Feb 2024 05:20:42 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.11.0-alpha0-144-ge5821d614e-fm-20240125.002-ge5821d61 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: asahi@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <87302cfa-c3ec-4d60-b870-a86acf0f6f8b@app.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20240122153442.7250-1-arnd@kernel.org> <170594251756.17335.7078970144473561827.b4-ty@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2024 11:20:21 +0100 From: "Arnd Bergmann" To: "Linux regressions mailing list" , "Srinivas Kandagatla" , "Miquel Raynal" , "Arnd Bergmann" Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Rafa=C5=82_Mi=C5=82ecki?= , "Chen-Yu Tsai" , "Greg Kroah-Hartman" , asahi@lists.linux.dev, "Sven Peter" , "Michael Walle" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvmem: include bit index in cell sysfs file name Content-Type: text/plain On Fri, Feb 9, 2024, at 10:09, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: > On 22.01.24 17:55, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: >> On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 16:34:10 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>> Creating sysfs files for all Cells caused a boot failure for linux-6.8-rc1 on >>> Apple M1, which (in downstream dts files) has multiple nvmem cells that use the >>> same byte address. This causes the device probe to fail with >>> >>> [ 0.605336] sysfs: cannot create duplicate filename '/devices/platform/soc@200000000/2922bc000.efuse/apple_efuses_nvmem0/cells/efuse@a10' >>> [ 0.605347] CPU: 7 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Tainted: G S 6.8.0-rc1-arnd-5+ #133 >>> [ 0.605355] Hardware name: Apple Mac Studio (M1 Ultra, 2022) (DT) >>> [ 0.605362] Call trace: >>> [...] >> >> Applied, thanks! >> >> [1/1] nvmem: include bit index in cell sysfs file name >> commit: b40fed13870045731e374e6bb48800cde0feb4e2 > > The problem description from Arnd to an outsider like me sounded like > this is something that should be fixed rather sooner than later in > mainline. Am I wrong with that? If not: will this be heading to Linus > soon? Just wondering, as the fix seems to be a in "for-next" branch[1] > of the nvmem repo and not in a "fixes" branch. Yes, this that this needs to be fixed before v6.8 is out. I assumed it had gone upstream already. If anyone is still unsure about the ABI, we could also revert the original commit 0088cbc19276 ("nvmem: core: Expose cells through sysfs") for v6.8 and try again for v6.9 with the fixed ABI, but I think we already had an agreement on the changes that I sent. Arnd