Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] Add SMP bringup support for mt65xx socs
From: Yingjoe Chen
Date: Thu Sep 24 2015 - 11:45:56 EST
On Fri, 2015-08-07 at 18:50 +0800, Yingjoe Chen wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-08-05 at 23:31 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > The problem is that this patch series uses memblock_reserve() way after
> > the memory has been transitioned out of memblock's control, so actually
> > this has no effect.
> > I've seen a number of patches doing this. I'm not sure what's soo friggin
> > hard for people to understand: memblock is about the EARLY stages of
> > getting the system up and running. Once the memory has been handed
> > over to the kernel's memory management, memblock MUST NOT BE USED to
> > reserve memory.
> > There is one place, and one place only in the ARM kernel where
> > memblock_reserve() is possible, and that's in the ->reserve machine
> > callback. NOWHERE ELSE is permissible.
> It seems we can write memory-reserve node in device tree to do this as
> well. Do you prefer us to reserve memblock in reserve callback or using
> device tree?
After consideration, I decide to reserve this memory in device tree. The
memory is already used by trustzone, we should reserved them even when
we don't run SMP. I just sent out a new series, please help to review
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/