On Mon, Jul 8, 2024 at 5:12 PM Oreoluwa Babatunde <quic_obabatun@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > 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/ Sorry, but I'm not taking reverts of half the series. I've dropped it all for 6.11. Rob
