On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Wang, Yalin <Yalin.Wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Grant Likely [mailto:glikely@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Grant Likely >> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 6:05 PM >> To: Wang, Yalin; 'robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx'; 'devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'; >> 'pawel.moll@xxxxxxx'; 'mark.rutland@xxxxxxx'; >> 'ijc+devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'; 'linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' >> Subject: RE: [RFC] fdt:free the fdt reserved memory >> >> On Thu, 4 Dec 2014 14:56:11 +0800 >> , "Wang, Yalin" <Yalin.Wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Grant Likely [mailto:glikely@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Grant >> > > Likely >> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2014 10:45 PM >> > > To: Wang, Yalin; 'robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx'; 'devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'; >> > > 'pawel.moll@xxxxxxx'; 'mark.rutland@xxxxxxx'; >> > > 'ijc+devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'; 'linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' >> > > Subject: Re: [RFC] fdt:free the fdt reserved memory >> > > >> > > On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 17:25:12 +0800, "Wang, Yalin" >> > > <Yalin.Wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > > This patch make some change to unflatten_dt_node(), make sure the >> > > > device_node don't reference to fdt raw blob memory, so that we can >> > > > free the raw blob reserved memory after initcalls. >> > > > >> > > > Signed-off-by: Yalin Wang <yalin.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > > >> > > Do you have any measurements showing a change in available memory >> > > before and after the patch? >> > > >> > Does anyone have a look at this patch? >> > It can save 12K on my platform, >> > My dtb is 164K >> >> Yes, I've been thinking about this one. Unfortunately there is a conflict >> with another feature that I'm merging for v3.19. See commit 08d53aa5, >> "of/fdt: export fdt blob as /sys/firmware/fdt" in linux-next. >> That commit requires the original blob to be kept around. >> >> In order to free the original dtb, the /sys/firmware/fdt feature will need >> to be changed to let it be configured out. All things considered, that is >> probably the right thing to do, but doing so increases the memory load for >> the platforms that want /sys/firmware/fdt. I'd like to see what the impact >> would be on the code to switch to this method when /sys/firmware/fdt is >> configured out. >> > Oh, I understand, > If enable /sys/firmware/fdt feature patch, doesn't need > My patch is fine, > So need 2 method to unflatten dtb blob. I don't want to duplicate the function. It would instead need to be a build time configuration to the function that if /sys/firmware/fdt is enabled, then copying the property on unflatten is disabled. g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
