On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 06:08:10PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 08:43:47AM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 03:58:17PM +0800, Calvin Zhang wrote: > > > The count of reserved regions in /reserved-memory was limited because > > > the struct reserved_mem array was defined statically. This series sorts > > > out reserved memory code and allocates that array from early allocator. > > > > > > Note: reserved region with fixed location must be reserved before any > > > memory allocation. While struct reserved_mem array should be allocated > > > after allocator is activated. We make early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem() > > > do reservation only and add another call to initialize reserved memory. > > > So arch code have to change for it. > > > > I think much simpler would be to use the same constant for sizing > > memblock.reserved and reserved_mem arrays. > > Do those arrays get shrunk? Or do we waste the memory forever? Memblock arrays don't get shrunk, but they are __init unless an architecture chose to keep them after boot, but most architectures that use device tree actually keep memblock structures. > Maybe we can copy and shrink the initial array? Though I suspect struct > reserved_mem pointers have already been given out. I'm not sure. It seems that reserved_mem pointers are given out at initcall time and AFAIU the reserved_mem array is created somewhere around setup_arch(). So maybe it's possible to copy and shrink the initial array. > > > > If there is too much reserved regions in the device tree, reserving them in > > memblock will fail anyway because memblock also starts with static array > > for memblock.reserved, so doing one pass with memblock_reserve() and > > another to set up reserved_mem wouldn't help anyway. > > > > > I'm only familiar with arm and arm64 architectures. Approvals from arch > > > maintainers are required. Thank you all. -- Sincerely yours, Mike.
