[PATCH v3 0/5] Add SMP bringup support for mt65xx socs
Yingjoe Chen
yingjoe.chen at mediatek.com
Fri Aug 7 03:50:18 PDT 2015
On Wed, 2015-08-05 at 23:31 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 08:44:11PM +0200, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> > On Tuesday, July 14, 2015 01:18:26 PM Yingjoe Chen wrote:
> > > This series add SMP brinup support for MediaTek SoCs. This is based
> > > on v4.2-rc1 and Matthias' next branch (for dts parts).
<...>
> > Applied to v4.2-next/soc-2 and v4.2-next/dts-2
>
> I've just NAK'd one of the patches in this set; I don't tend to even see
> mediatek patches normally, as they all head into my junk mailfolder
> because mediatek's mail server setup is truely abysmal (it has broken
> reverse DNS - the DNS positively says that the mail server is not a
> legit owner of the name it claims to be.)
Hi Russell,
Hope you see this.
Thanks for your review. I already pass this information to our IT, hope
they can resolve this soon.
> 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?
Joe.C
More information about the Linux-mediatek
mailing list