On Wed, 2015-08-05 at 23:31 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 08:44:11PM +0200, Matthias Brugger wrote: > > On Tuesday, July 14, 2015 01:18:26 PM Yingjoe Chen wrote: > > > This series add SMP brinup support for MediaTek SoCs. This is based > > > on v4.2-rc1 and Matthias' next branch (for dts parts). <...> > > Applied to v4.2-next/soc-2 and v4.2-next/dts-2 > > I've just NAK'd one of the patches in this set; I don't tend to even see > mediatek patches normally, as they all head into my junk mailfolder > because mediatek's mail server setup is truely abysmal (it has broken > reverse DNS - the DNS positively says that the mail server is not a > legit owner of the name it claims to be.) Hi Russell, Hope you see this. Thanks for your review. I already pass this information to our IT, hope they can resolve this soon. > The problem is that this patch series uses memblock_reserve() way after > the memory has been transitioned out of memblock's control, so actually > this has no effect. > > I've seen a number of patches doing this. I'm not sure what's soo friggin > hard for people to understand: memblock is about the EARLY stages of > getting the system up and running. Once the memory has been handed > over to the kernel's memory management, memblock MUST NOT BE USED to > reserve memory. > > There is one place, and one place only in the ARM kernel where > memblock_reserve() is possible, and that's in the ->reserve machine > callback. NOWHERE ELSE is permissible. It seems we can write memory-reserve node in device tree to do this as well. Do you prefer us to reserve memblock in reserve callback or using device tree? Joe.C -- 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
