From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92485C4360C for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 19:36:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51529208C3 for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 19:36:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="lFVH4DJZ" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 51529208C3 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id D83346B0277; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 15:36:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id D33006B0278; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 15:36:07 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id C209A6B0279; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 15:36:07 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0091.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.91]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99BC26B0277 for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 15:36:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin28.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 22A4F824376E for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 19:36:07 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 75978077574.28.bells98_527234531b419 X-HE-Tag: bells98_527234531b419 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 6786 Received: from mail-io1-f65.google.com (mail-io1-f65.google.com [209.85.166.65]) by imf47.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 19:36:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io1-f65.google.com with SMTP id b136so9695497iof.3 for ; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 12:36:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=uv8sypDhr4ui+8J14AcrUpiwkTC+Ius1tZ05+vuLNHk=; b=lFVH4DJZInfXaRXpqmiMEK9WpeSM/1iq4W9bn5uziJHuNnpDS5uJfwrrSMkKUYaoWu tjIzRew236DgZA4ISwubGuuzdkMEJIbQ8yLo4Gw4blLNNqTUJXJQc2T8EmFOMMaE/MZN TWI21uIOpWZV0B6kiTUPUzXP+86XUqzfSXBes1IbztoB6sCaCe2+0vHVrK7I1YSyHTRf vUusvWxQUo6svZWbb5qWyg1vE5i/0/5lEgToMxkxJ7QF/bNuxlBlDbD6OXf3ku60x8mI qYDnylEQgvdyDcRtg2M6u1XUP8jT9lELn92+Mho67HMmT8OkOdOtqWogr7E2TIwC5RUe rt7w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=uv8sypDhr4ui+8J14AcrUpiwkTC+Ius1tZ05+vuLNHk=; b=KK3fGIPtbanr73Q6Cez2X5RiL/DJ0rPf6N+IUIdEXSV9PyMVJ/LeuuJmT2+AHkA6B3 3K8t8RwIiHsKxGHvssMmtadAvoJMALqcc35b6S+bTIIfJF/NjzaLkitAiAqrrtgEXNWr E84VdLet4LYcZkoVfxP3jixHIanaCJ6wIjfshR27JNaBgXITIuGRIXCrVc5a402I360m HfcTdFeLEeMey5NjtqBZl9sjZyVYWN6c8iLwNbCl9sLnSy54EY8QNawq+Pf+kkjK7gyJ NNuc9HWpAQ86gaUbyKeY73CNpbDYFx7j8Gkaix5Uz23v7Sc6qu3+1B7s6zSWU2taIeJD M50Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX5vtqHQb+1FZvot0g25W91y+ip8ploNsDT70LIZS15omQK8dXQ LH9mlN7fELAVF3iRceibMRiMRSNKSojIJptdkto= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz6Gzzz4fph8SDTgwR3nXuuRIG8y0wd6XvcO9/S+doLjWzArUyv9IHucQgjs6f3GvWFnHs+ZCUo69B6L3/gML4= X-Received: by 2002:a92:9912:: with SMTP id p18mr378753ili.78.1569526565531; Thu, 26 Sep 2019 12:36:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1548057848-15136-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.ibm.com> <20190926160433.GD32311@linux.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20190926160433.GD32311@linux.ibm.com> From: Adam Ford Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 14:35:53 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/21] Refine memblock API To: Mike Rapoport Cc: Fabio Estevam , Rich Felker , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Petr Mladek , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas , Heiko Carstens , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Max Filippov , Guo Ren , Michael Ellerman , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-c6x-dev@linux-c6x.org, Yoshinori Sato , Richard Weinberger , x86@kernel.org, Russell King , kasan-dev , Geert Uytterhoeven , Mark Salter , Dennis Zhou , Matt Turner , linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org, uclinux-h8-devel@lists.sourceforge.jp, devicetree , linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org, linux-um@lists.infradead.org, The etnaviv authors , linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, Rob Herring , Greentime Hu , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Stafford Horne , Guan Xuetao , arm-soc , Michal Simek , Tony Luck , Linux Memory Management List , Greg Kroah-Hartman , USB list , linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, Paul Burton , Vineet Gupta , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "David S. Miller" , openrisc@lists.librecores.org, Chris Healy Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:04 AM Mike Rapoport wrote: > > Hi, > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 08:09:52AM -0500, Adam Ford wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:17 AM Fabio Estevam wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 9:17 AM Adam Ford wrote: > > > > > > > I tried cma=256M and noticed the cma dump at the beginning didn't > > > > change. Do we need to setup a reserved-memory node like > > > > imx6ul-ccimx6ulsom.dtsi did? > > > > > > I don't think so. > > > > > > Were you able to identify what was the exact commit that caused such regression? > > > > I was able to narrow it down the 92d12f9544b7 ("memblock: refactor > > internal allocation functions") that caused the regression with > > Etnaviv. > > > Can you please test with this change: > That appears to have fixed my issue. I am not sure what the impact is, but is this a safe option? adam > diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c > index 7d4f61a..1f5a0eb 100644 > --- a/mm/memblock.c > +++ b/mm/memblock.c > @@ -1356,9 +1356,6 @@ static phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc_range_nid(phys_addr_t size, > align = SMP_CACHE_BYTES; > } > > - if (end > memblock.current_limit) > - end = memblock.current_limit; > - > again: > found = memblock_find_in_range_node(size, align, start, end, nid, > flags); > > > I also noticed that if I create a reserved memory node as was done one > > imx6ul-ccimx6ulsom.dtsi the 3D seems to work again, but without it, I > > was getting errors regardless of the 'cma=256M' or not. > > I don't have a problem using the reserved memory, but I guess I am not > > sure what the amount should be. I know for the video decoding 1080p, > > I have historically used cma=128M, but with the 3D also needing some > > memory allocation, is that enough or should I use 256M? > > > > adam > > -- > Sincerely yours, > Mike. >