On Fri, 2015-08-07 at 18:50 +0800, Yingjoe Chen wrote: > On Wed, 2015-08-05 at 23:31 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > 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? After consideration, I decide to reserve this memory in device tree. The memory is already used by trustzone, we should reserved them even when we don't run SMP. I just sent out a new series, please help to review them. Thanks 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
