[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YiNiEqC294xQ6PXD@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2022 15:13:54 +0200
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...am.me.uk>
Cc: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Xuefeng Li <lixuefeng@...ngson.cn>, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] MIPS: Refactor early_parse_mem() to fix mem=
parameter
On Fri, Mar 04, 2022 at 05:11:44PM +0000, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2022, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
>
> > > > With this patch, when add "mem=3G" to the command-line, the
> > > > kernel boots successfully, we can see the following messages:
> > >
> > > unfortunately this patch would break platforms without memory detection,
> > > which simply use mem=32M for memory configuration. Not sure how many
> > > rely on this mechanism. If we can make sure nobody uses it, I'm fine
> > > with your patch.
> >
> > maybe we could add a CONFIG option, which will be selected by
> > platforms, which don't need/want this usermem thing.
>
> FWIW I don't understand what the issue is here beyond that we have a bug
> that causes a system to hang when "mem=3G" is passed on the kernel command
> line. That is assuming that system does have contiguous RAM available for
> the kernel to use from address 0 up to 3GiB; otherwise it's a user error
> to tell the kernel it has that memory available (I did get bitten by that
> myself too): garbage in, garbage out.
This is exactly the case here because the system does not have contiguous
RAM:
[ 0.000000] Early memory node ranges
[ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x0000000004000000-0x000000000effffff]
[ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x0000000090200000-0x00000000ffffffff]
[ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x0000000120000000-0x00000001653fffff]
(from patch 3/4 in this series)
I don't see what "bug" this patch is trying to fix. Is indeed possible to
make MIPS' mem= behave like it does not arm64 and ppc, but that would break
systems that use current semantics and I recall seeing some of OpenWRT
machines using mem= to override memory map supplied by firmware.
> Maciej
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists