[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 00/21] Refine memblock API
I am attaching two logs. I now the mailing lists will be unhappy, but don't want to try and spam a bunch of log through the mailing liast. The two logs show the differences between the working and non-working imx6q 3D accelerator when trying to run a simple glmark2-es2-drm demo. The only change between them is the 2 line code change you suggested. In both cases, I have cma=128M set in my bootargs. Historically this has been sufficient, but cma=256M has not made a difference. adam On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 2:33 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 02:35:53PM -0500, Adam Ford wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 11:04 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 08:09:52AM -0500, Adam Ford wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:17 AM Fabio Estevam <festevam@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 9:17 AM Adam Ford <aford173@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I tried cma=256M and noticed the cma dump at the beginning didn't > > > > > > change. Do we need to setup a reserved-memory node like > > > > > > imx6ul-ccimx6ulsom.dtsi did? > > > > > > > > > > I don't think so. > > > > > > > > > > Were you able to identify what was the exact commit that caused such > > > > > regression? > > > > > > > > I was able to narrow it down the 92d12f9544b7 ("memblock: refactor > > > > internal allocation functions") that caused the regression with > > > > Etnaviv. > > > > > > > > > Can you please test with this change: > > > > > > > That appears to have fixed my issue. I am not sure what the impact > > is, but is this a safe option? > > It's not really a fix, I just wanted to see how exactly 92d12f9544b7 > ("memblock: > refactor internal allocation functions") broke your setup. > > Can you share the dts you are using and the full kernel log? > > > adam > > > > > diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c > > > index 7d4f61a..1f5a0eb 100644 > > > --- a/mm/memblock.c > > > +++ b/mm/memblock.c > > > @@ -1356,9 +1356,6 @@ static phys_addr_t __init > > > memblock_alloc_range_nid(phys_addr_t size, > > > align = SMP_CACHE_BYTES; > > > } > > > > > > - if (end > memblock.current_limit) > > > - end = memblock.current_limit; > > > - > > > again: > > > found = memblock_find_in_range_node(size, align, start, end, nid, > > > flags); > > > > > > > I also noticed that if I create a reserved memory node as was done one > > > > imx6ul-ccimx6ulsom.dtsi the 3D seems to work again, but without it, I > > > > was getting errors regardless of the 'cma=256M' or not. > > > > I don't have a problem using the reserved memory, but I guess I am not > > > > sure what the amount should be. I know for the video decoding 1080p, > > > > I have historically used cma=128M, but with the 3D also needing some > > > > memory allocation, is that enough or should I use 256M? > > > > > > > > adam > > > > > > -- > > > Sincerely yours, > > > Mike. > > > > > -- > Sincerely yours, > Mike. > Attachment:
imx6q-working.log Attachment:
imx6q-non-working.log _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |