From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bin Meng Date: Tue, 7 May 2019 17:28:25 +0800 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 45/50] Revert "pci: Scale MAX_PCI_REGIONS based on CONFIG_NR_DRAM_BANKS" In-Reply-To: References: <20190426035922.20596-1-sjg@chromium.org> <20190426035922.20596-46-sjg@chromium.org> <20190502092452.GA30634@ulmo> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Simon, Thierry, On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 12:22 AM Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Thierry, > > On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 03:25, Thierry Reding wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 12:09:49AM +0800, Bin Meng wrote: > > > +Thierry > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 12:00 PM Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > > > > This reverts commit aec4298ccb337106fd0115b91d846a022fdf301d. > > > > > > > > Unfortunately this has a dramatic impact on the pre-relocation memory > > > > used on x86 platforms (increasing it by 2KB) since it increases the > > > > overhead for each PCI device from 220 bytes to 412 bytes. > > > > > > > > The offending line is in UCLASS_DRIVER(pci): > > > > > > > > .per_device_auto_alloc_size = sizeof(struct pci_controller), > > > > > > > > This means that all PCI devices have the controller struct associated > > > > with them. The solution is to move the regions[] member out of the array, > > > > makes its size dynamic, or split UCLASS_PCI into controllers and > > > > non-controllers, as the comment suggests. > > > > > > > > For now, revert the commit to get things running again. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Changes in v2: None > > > > > > > > include/pci.h | 6 +----- > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Bin Meng > > > > Ugh... so we're trading one regression for another? Can we not live with > > the 2 KiB increase on x86 until this has been properly fixed? Currently > > this will cause Jetson TX2 to crash if it starts using PCI. > > Unfortunately this breaks several boards since we are out of memory. > > I think this needs a better solution to reduce the memory usage down > to sensible levels. This is something I should have considered when > implementing the PCI uclass, but unfortunately I did not. > Could you please suggest whether I should apply this revert patch for now? Regards, Bin