linux-snps-arc.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: aford173@gmail.com (Adam Ford)
To: linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 00/21] Refine memblock API
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 08:09:52 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHCN7xJ32BYZu-DVTVLSzv222U50JDb8F0A_tLDERbb8kPdRxg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOMZO5D2uzR6Sz1QnX3G-Ce_juxU-0PO_vBZX+nR1mpQB8s8-w@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Sep 25, 2019@10:17 AM Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019@9:17 AM Adam Ford <aford173@gmail.com> 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.

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

  reply	other threads:[~2019-09-26 13:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-01-21  8:03 [PATCH v2 00/21] Refine memblock API Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:03 ` [PATCH v2 01/21] openrisc: prefer memblock APIs returning virtual address Mike Rapoport
2019-01-27  3:07   ` Stafford Horne
2019-01-21  8:03 ` [PATCH v2 02/21] powerpc: use memblock functions " Mike Rapoport
2019-01-29  9:52   ` Michael Ellerman
2019-01-21  8:03 ` [PATCH v2 03/21] memblock: replace memblock_alloc_base(ANYWHERE) with memblock_phys_alloc Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:03 ` [PATCH v2 04/21] memblock: drop memblock_alloc_base_nid() Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:03 ` [PATCH v2 05/21] memblock: emphasize that memblock_alloc_range() returns a physical address Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:03 ` [PATCH v2 06/21] memblock: memblock_phys_alloc_try_nid(): don't panic Mike Rapoport
2019-01-25 17:45   ` Catalin Marinas
2019-01-25 19:32     ` Mike Rapoport
2019-01-29  9:56   ` Michael Ellerman
2019-01-29  9:58     ` Michael Ellerman
2019-01-21  8:03 ` [PATCH v2 07/21] memblock: memblock_phys_alloc(): " Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:03 ` [PATCH v2 08/21] memblock: drop __memblock_alloc_base() Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:03 ` [PATCH v2 09/21] memblock: drop memblock_alloc_base() Mike Rapoport
2019-01-29 10:29   ` Michael Ellerman
2019-01-21  8:03 ` [PATCH v2 10/21] memblock: refactor internal allocation functions Mike Rapoport
2019-02-03  9:39   ` Michael Ellerman
2019-02-03 10:04     ` Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:03 ` [PATCH v2 11/21] memblock: make memblock_find_in_range_node() and choose_memblock_flags() static Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:03 ` [PATCH v2 12/21] arch: use memblock_alloc() instead of memblock_alloc_from(size, align, 0) Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:04 ` [PATCH v2 13/21] arch: don't memset(0) memory returned by memblock_alloc() Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:04 ` [PATCH v2 14/21] ia64: add checks for the return value of memblock_alloc*() Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:04 ` [PATCH v2 15/21] sparc: " Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:04 ` [PATCH v2 16/21] mm/percpu: " Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:04 ` [PATCH v2 17/21] init/main: " Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:04 ` [PATCH v2 18/21] swiotlb: " Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:04 ` [PATCH v2 19/21] treewide: " Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:39   ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-01-21 17:18   ` Rob Herring
2019-01-31  6:07   ` Christophe Leroy
2019-01-31  6:41     ` Mike Rapoport
2019-01-31  6:44       ` Christophe Leroy
2019-01-31  7:07         ` Christophe Leroy
2019-01-31  7:14           ` Mike Rapoport
2019-01-31 15:23   ` Max Filippov
2019-01-21  8:04 ` [PATCH v2 20/21] memblock: memblock_alloc_try_nid: don't panic Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21  8:04 ` [PATCH v2 21/21] memblock: drop memblock_alloc_*_nopanic() variants Mike Rapoport
2019-01-30 13:38   ` Petr Mladek
2019-09-24 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 00/21] Refine memblock API Adam Ford
2019-09-25 12:12   ` Fabio Estevam
2019-09-25 12:17     ` Adam Ford
2019-09-25 15:17       ` Fabio Estevam
2019-09-26 13:09         ` Adam Ford [this message]
2019-09-26 16:04           ` Mike Rapoport
2019-09-26 19:35             ` Adam Ford
2019-09-28  7:33               ` Mike Rapoport
2019-09-29 13:33                 ` Adam Ford
2019-10-02  0:14                   ` Adam Ford
2019-10-02  7:36                     ` Mike Rapoport
2019-10-02 11:14                       ` Adam Ford

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAHCN7xJ32BYZu-DVTVLSzv222U50JDb8F0A_tLDERbb8kPdRxg@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=aford173@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).