On 7/5/2024 8:38 AM, Klara Modin wrote: > On 2024-07-05 15:05, Klara Modin wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 2024-05-29 00:36, Oreoluwa Babatunde wrote: >>> The unflatten_devicetree APIs have been setup and are available to be >>> used by the time the fdt_init_reserved_mem() function is called. >>> Since the unflatten_devicetree APIs are a more efficient way of scanning >>> through the DT nodes, switch to using these APIs to facilitate the rest >>> of the reserved memory processing. >> >> With this patch series, I've observed significantly less memory available to userspace on my Raspberry Pi 1 and 3. >> >> I see this message on the kernel console: >> Jul 4 23:13:49 bonnet kernel: OF: reserved mem: 0x1b000000..0x1effffff (65536 KiB) map non-reusable linux >> >> where it was previously marked as reusable: >> Jul 4 22:23:22 bonnet kernel: OF: reserved mem: 0x1b000000..0x1effffff (65536 KiB) map reusable linux,cma >> >> If I look at bcm283x.dtsi, it definitely has the reusable property. >> >> I've below pointed out the snippet I think could be suspicous. >> >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Oreoluwa Babatunde <quic_obabatun@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c | 93 ++++++++++++++++++++------------- >>> include/linux/of_reserved_mem.h | 2 +- >>> kernel/dma/coherent.c | 10 ++-- >>> kernel/dma/contiguous.c | 8 +-- >>> kernel/dma/swiotlb.c | 10 ++-- >>> 5 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c >>> index 113d593ea031..05283cd24c3b 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c >>> +++ b/drivers/of/of_reserved_mem.c > >>> @@ -447,7 +476,7 @@ static int __init __reserved_mem_alloc_size(unsigned long node, const char *unam >>> uname, (unsigned long)(size / SZ_1M)); >>> return -ENOMEM; >>> } >> >> >>> - fdt_reserved_mem_save_node(node, uname, base, size); >>> + fdt_reserved_mem_save_node(NULL, uname, base, size); >> >> This could perhaps be suspicious? >> >> The above message seems to come from of_init_reserved_mem_node when >> called from of_reserved_mem_save_node when called from here. This would mean that the node is not actually saved to rmem and thus not marked reusable? >> >> >>> return 0; >>> } > >> >> Regards, >> Klara Modin > > Attaching kernel logs of old and new behavior, and my config for reference. Hi Klara, Thanks for pointing this out. I have uploaded a fix here: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240708230613.448846-1-quic_obabatun@xxxxxxxxxxx/ Please test and see if this fixes the issue. Thank you! Oreoluwa
