[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <826cd775-14d2-12ae-2e96-cf0766aa1502@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2022 10:38:47 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi <michael@...rulasolutions.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Correlation CMA size and FORCE_MAX_ZONEORDER
On 15.09.22 23:36, Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi wrote:
> Hi all
Hi,
>
> Working on a small device with 128MB of memory and using imx_v6_v7
> defconfig I found that CMA_SIZE_MBYTES, CMA_SIZE_PERCENTAGE
> are not respected. The calculation done does not allow the requested
> size. I think that this should be somehow documented and described but
> I did not
> find the documentation. Does it work this way?
>
> With CMA_SIZE of 8MB I need to have FORCE_MAX_ZONEORDER=12 if I have
> the default FORCE_MAX_ZONEORDER=14 the min size is 32Mb
The underlying constraint is that CMA regions require a certain minimum
alignment+size. They cannot be arbitrarily in size.
CMA_MIN_ALIGNMENT_BYTES expresses that, and corresponds in upstream
kernels to the size of a single pageblock.
In previous kernels, it used to be the size of the largest buddy
allocation granularity (derived from MAX_ORDER, derived from
FORCE_MAX_ZONEORDER).
On upstream kernels, the FORCE_MAX_ZONEORDER constraint should no longer
apply. On most archs, the minimum alignment+size should be 2 MiB
(x86-64, aarch64 with 4k base pages) -- the size of a single pageblock.
So far the theory. Are you still running into this limitation on
upstream kernels?
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists