Nishant,
> Would it be better that we make this as a board specific memory
> requirement? not all boards will have the same needs right?
For every 1MB of DSP Virtual address 1Kbytes of physical memory is required for house keeping. So, for 256MB we would be taking 256K as opposed to 64K when using 64MB DSP virtual memory.
The requirement comes more from Multimedia requirements, and with all the new phones having the requirement of running multiple multimedia applications in parallel 256K would be safe.
Thank you,
Best regards,
Hari
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Menon, Nishanth
> Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 8:28 AM
> To: Kanigeri, Hari
> Cc: Ramirez Luna, Omar; linux-omap; Hiroshi Doyu; Ameya Palande; Felipe
> Contreras; Guzman Lugo, Fernando; Ramos Falcon, Ernesto; Aguilar Pena,
> Leed
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] DSPBRIDGE: Increased DMM size to 256MB
>
> Kanigeri, Hari had written, on 01/07/2010 11:16 PM, the following:
> > Nishant,
> >
> > With 64MB we were seeing cases of running out of DSP virtual memory when
> running multiple Multimedia use cases in parallel at a time.
> Would it be better that we make this as a board specific memory
> requirement? not all boards will have the same needs right?
>
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Best regards,
> > Hari
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Menon, Nishanth
> > Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 7:48 AM
> > To: Ramirez Luna, Omar
> > Cc: linux-omap; Hiroshi Doyu; Ameya Palande; Felipe Contreras; Guzman
> Lugo, Fernando; Ramos Falcon, Ernesto; Kanigeri, Hari; Aguilar Pena, Leed
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] DSPBRIDGE: Increased DMM size to 256MB
> >
> > Ramirez Luna, Omar had written, on 01/07/2010 07:00 PM, the following:
> >> From: Hari Kanigeri <h-kanigeri2@xxxxxx>
> >>
> >> This patch increases the DMM from 64MB to 256MB.
> >
> > begs the question: Why?
> >
> >> Signed-off-by: Hari Kanigeri <h-kanigeri2@xxxxxx>
> >> Signed-off-by: Omar Ramirez Luna <omar.ramirez@xxxxxx>
> >> Signed-off-by: Leed Aguilar <leed.aguilar@xxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> arch/arm/plat-omap/include/dspbridge/dmm.h | 2 +-
> >> drivers/dsp/bridge/pmgr/dmm.c | 8 ++++----
> >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/dspbridge/dmm.h
> b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/dspbridge/dmm.h
> >> index 335edf8..af0c35a 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/dspbridge/dmm.h
> >> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/dspbridge/dmm.h
> >> @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@
> >> u32 reserved;
> >> } ;
> >>
> >> -#define DMMPOOLSIZE 0x4000000
> >> +#define DMMPOOLSIZE 0x10000000
> >>
> >> /*
> >> * ======== DMM_GetHandle ========
> >> diff --git a/drivers/dsp/bridge/pmgr/dmm.c
> b/drivers/dsp/bridge/pmgr/dmm.c
> >> index 46c05c6..f878855 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/dsp/bridge/pmgr/dmm.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/dsp/bridge/pmgr/dmm.c
> >> @@ -103,10 +103,10 @@ static struct GT_Mask DMM_debugMask = { NULL,
> NULL }; /* GT trace variable */
> >>
> >> static u32 cRefs; /* module reference count */
> >> struct MapPage {
> >> - u32 RegionSize:15;
> >> - u32 MappedSize:15;
> >> - u32 bReserved:1;
> >> - u32 bMapped:1;
> >> + u64 RegionSize:31;
> >> + u64 MappedSize:31;
> >> + u64 bReserved:1;
> >> + u64 bMapped:1;
>
> this does not make much sense meanwhile.. what does this have to do with
> the dmmpool size increase and what are these unused fields being used for?
>
> >> };
> >>
> >> /* Create the free list */
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Nishanth Menon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
