[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdXfFhzm48U2Hvjz8yrjPsQbagW4aC_L-QE_Q6yx1Lo=tA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2021 08:59:03 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Nick Kossifidis <mick@....forth.gr>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>, Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/10] memblock: Add variables for usable memory limitation
Hi Mike,
On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 11:31 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 07:51:01AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 02:50:12PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > Add two global variables (cap_mem_addr and cap_mem_size) for storing a
> > > base address and size, describing a limited region in which memory may
> > > be considered available for use by the kernel. If enabled, memory
> > > outside of this range is not available for use.
> > >
> > > These variables can by filled by firmware-specific code, and used in
> > > calls to memblock_cap_memory_range() by architecture-specific code.
> > > An example user is the parser of the "linux,usable-memory-range"
> > > property in the DT "/chosen" node.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>
> > > ---
> > > This is similar to how the initial ramdisk (phys_initrd_{start,size})
> > > and ELF core headers (elfcorehdr_{addr,size})) are handled.
> > >
> > > Does there exist a suitable place in the common memblock code to call
> > > "memblock_cap_memory_range(cap_mem_addr, cap_mem_size)", or does this
> > > have to be done in architecture-specific code?
> >
> > Can't you just call it from early_init_dt_scan_usablemem? If the
> > property is present, you want to call it. If the property is not
> > present, nothing happens.
I will have a look...
> For memblock_cap_memory_range() to work properly it should be called after
> memory is detected and added to memblock with memblock_add[_node]()
>
> I'm not huge fan of adding more globals to memblock so if such ordering can
> be implemented on the DT side it would be great.
Me neither ;-)
> I don't see a way to actually enforce this ordering, so maybe we'd want to
> add warning in memblock_cap_memory_range() if memblock.memory is empty.
"linux,usable-memory-range" is optional, and typically used only in
crashdump kernels, so it would be a bad idea to add such a warning.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists