From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux•ibm.com>
To: Adam Ford <aford173@gmail•com>
Cc: Rich Felker <dalias@libc•org>,
linux-ia64@vger•kernel.org, linux-sh@vger•kernel.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm•com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de•ibm.com>,
linux-mips@vger•kernel.org, Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail•com>,
devicetree <devicetree@vger•kernel.org>,
Guo Ren <guoren@kernel•org>,
sparclinux@vger•kernel.org, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail•com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst•de>,
linux-s390@vger•kernel.org, linux-c6x-dev@linux-c6x•org,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users•sourceforge.jp>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod•at>,
x86@kernel•org, Russell King <linux@armlinux•org.uk>,
kasan-dev <kasan-dev@googlegroups•com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k•org>,
Mark Salter <msalter@redhat•com>, Dennis Zhou <dennis@kernel•org>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail•com>,
linux-snps-arc@lists•infradead.org,
Chris Healy <cphealy@gmail•com>,
uclinux-h8-devel@lists•sourceforge.jp,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse•com>,
linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa•org, linux-alpha@vger•kernel.org,
linux-um@lists•infradead.org,
The etnaviv authors <etnaviv@lists•freedesktop.org>,
linux-m68k@lists•linux-m68k.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel•org>,
Greentime Hu <green.hu@gmail•com>,
xen-devel@lists•xenproject.org, Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail•com>,
Guan Xuetao <gxt@pku•edu.cn>,
arm-soc <linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org>,
Michal Simek <monstr@monstr•eu>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel•com>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack•org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation•org>,
USB list <linux-usb@vger•kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org>,
Paul Burton <paul.burton@mips•com>,
Vineet Gupta <vgupta@synopsys•com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation•org>,
linuxppc-dev@lists•ozlabs.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft•net>,
openrisc@lists•librecores.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/21] Refine memblock API
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 10:36:06 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191002073605.GA30433@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHCN7xKLhWw4P9-sZKXQcfSfh2r3J_+rLxuxACW0UVgimCzyVw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Adam,
On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 07:14:13PM -0500, Adam Ford wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 29, 2019 at 8:33 AM Adam Ford <aford173@gmail•com> wrote:
> >
> > 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.
> >
>
> Mike any suggestions on how to move forward?
> I was hoping to get the fixes tested and pushed before 5.4 is released
> if at all possible
I have a fix (below) that kinda restores the original behaviour, but I
still would like to double check to make sure it's not a band aid and I
haven't missed the actual root cause.
Can you please send me your device tree definition and the output of
cat /sys/kernel/debug/memblock/memory
and
cat /sys/kernel/debug/memblock/reserved
Thanks!
From 06529f861772b7dea2912fc2245debe4690139b8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux•ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 10:14:17 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] mm: memblock: do not enforce current limit for memblock_phys*
family
Until commit 92d12f9544b7 ("memblock: refactor internal allocation
functions") the maximal address for memblock allocations was forced to
memblock.current_limit only for the allocation functions returning virtual
address. The changes introduced by that commit moved the limit enforcement
into the allocation core and as a result the allocation functions returning
physical address also started to limit allocations to
memblock.current_limit.
This caused breakage of etnaviv GPU driver:
[ 3.682347] etnaviv etnaviv: bound 130000.gpu (ops gpu_ops)
[ 3.688669] etnaviv etnaviv: bound 134000.gpu (ops gpu_ops)
[ 3.695099] etnaviv etnaviv: bound 2204000.gpu (ops gpu_ops)
[ 3.700800] etnaviv-gpu 130000.gpu: model: GC2000, revision: 5108
[ 3.723013] etnaviv-gpu 130000.gpu: command buffer outside valid
memory window
[ 3.731308] etnaviv-gpu 134000.gpu: model: GC320, revision: 5007
[ 3.752437] etnaviv-gpu 134000.gpu: command buffer outside valid
memory window
[ 3.760583] etnaviv-gpu 2204000.gpu: model: GC355, revision: 1215
[ 3.766766] etnaviv-gpu 2204000.gpu: Ignoring GPU with VG and FE2.0
Restore the behaviour of memblock_phys* family so that these functions will
not enforce memblock.current_limit.
Fixes: 92d12f9544b7 ("memblock: refactor internal allocation functions")
Reported-by: Adam Ford <aford173@gmail•com>
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux•ibm.com>
---
mm/memblock.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
index 7d4f61a..c4b16ca 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);
@@ -1469,6 +1466,9 @@ static void * __init memblock_alloc_internal(
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(slab_is_available()))
return kzalloc_node(size, GFP_NOWAIT, nid);
+ if (max_addr > memblock.current_limit)
+ max_addr = memblock.current_limit;
+
alloc = memblock_alloc_range_nid(size, align, min_addr, max_addr, nid);
/* retry allocation without lower limit */
--
2.7.4
> > adam
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 2:33 AM Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux•ibm.com> 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@linux•ibm.com> 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@gmail•com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 9:17 AM Adam Ford <aford173@gmail•com> 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.
> > >
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-02 7:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-21 8:03 [PATCH v2 00/21] Refine memblock API Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:03 ` [PATCH v2 01/21] openrisc: prefer memblock APIs returning virtual address Mike Rapoport
2019-01-27 3:07 ` Stafford Horne
2019-01-21 8:03 ` [PATCH v2 02/21] powerpc: use memblock functions " Mike Rapoport
2019-01-29 9:52 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-01-21 8:03 ` [PATCH v2 03/21] memblock: replace memblock_alloc_base(ANYWHERE) with memblock_phys_alloc Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:03 ` [PATCH v2 04/21] memblock: drop memblock_alloc_base_nid() Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:03 ` [PATCH v2 05/21] memblock: emphasize that memblock_alloc_range() returns a physical address Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:03 ` [PATCH v2 06/21] memblock: memblock_phys_alloc_try_nid(): don't panic Mike Rapoport
2019-01-25 17:45 ` Catalin Marinas
2019-01-25 19:32 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-01-29 9:56 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-01-29 9:58 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-01-21 8:03 ` [PATCH v2 07/21] memblock: memblock_phys_alloc(): " Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:03 ` [PATCH v2 08/21] memblock: drop __memblock_alloc_base() Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:03 ` [PATCH v2 09/21] memblock: drop memblock_alloc_base() Mike Rapoport
2019-01-29 10:29 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-01-21 8:03 ` [PATCH v2 10/21] memblock: refactor internal allocation functions Mike Rapoport
2019-02-03 9:39 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-02-03 10:04 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-02-03 11:39 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-02-04 8:45 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-02-04 23:08 ` Stephen Rothwell
2019-01-21 8:03 ` [PATCH v2 11/21] memblock: make memblock_find_in_range_node() and choose_memblock_flags() static Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:03 ` [PATCH v2 12/21] arch: use memblock_alloc() instead of memblock_alloc_from(size, align, 0) Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:04 ` [PATCH v2 13/21] arch: don't memset(0) memory returned by memblock_alloc() Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:04 ` [PATCH v2 14/21] ia64: add checks for the return value of memblock_alloc*() Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:04 ` [PATCH v2 15/21] sparc: " Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:04 ` [PATCH v2 16/21] mm/percpu: " Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:04 ` [PATCH v2 17/21] init/main: " Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:04 ` [PATCH v2 18/21] swiotlb: " Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:04 ` [PATCH v2 19/21] treewide: " Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:39 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-01-21 17:18 ` Rob Herring
2019-01-31 6:07 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-01-31 6:41 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-01-31 6:44 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-01-31 7:07 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-01-31 7:14 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-01-31 15:23 ` Max Filippov
2019-01-21 8:04 ` [PATCH v2 20/21] memblock: memblock_alloc_try_nid: don't panic Mike Rapoport
2019-01-21 8:04 ` [PATCH v2 21/21] memblock: drop memblock_alloc_*_nopanic() variants Mike Rapoport
2019-01-30 13:38 ` Petr Mladek
2019-09-24 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 00/21] Refine memblock API Adam Ford
2019-09-25 12:12 ` Fabio Estevam
2019-09-25 12:17 ` Adam Ford
2019-09-25 15:17 ` Fabio Estevam
2019-09-26 13:09 ` Adam Ford
2019-09-26 16:04 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-09-26 19:35 ` Adam Ford
2019-09-28 7:33 ` Mike Rapoport
2019-09-29 13:33 ` Adam Ford
2019-10-02 0:14 ` Adam Ford
2019-10-02 7:36 ` Mike Rapoport [this message]
2019-10-02 11:14 ` Adam Ford
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191002073605.GA30433@linux.ibm.com \
--to=rppt@linux$(echo .)ibm.com \
--cc=aford173@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation$(echo .)org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm$(echo .)com \
--cc=cphealy@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=dalias@libc$(echo .)org \
--cc=davem@davemloft$(echo .)net \
--cc=dennis@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=devicetree@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=etnaviv@lists$(echo .)freedesktop.org \
--cc=festevam@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k$(echo .)org \
--cc=green.hu@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation$(echo .)org \
--cc=guoren@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=gxt@pku$(echo .)edu.cn \
--cc=hch@lst$(echo .)de \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de$(echo .)ibm.com \
--cc=jcmvbkbc@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups$(echo .)com \
--cc=linux-alpha@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
--cc=linux-c6x-dev@linux-c6x$(echo .)org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@lists$(echo .)linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack$(echo .)org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-snps-arc@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
--cc=linux-um@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa$(echo .)org \
--cc=linux@armlinux$(echo .)org.uk \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists$(echo .)ozlabs.org \
--cc=mattst88@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=monstr@monstr$(echo .)eu \
--cc=msalter@redhat$(echo .)com \
--cc=openrisc@lists$(echo .)librecores.org \
--cc=paul.burton@mips$(echo .)com \
--cc=pmladek@suse$(echo .)com \
--cc=richard@nod$(echo .)at \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=shorne@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=sparclinux@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=tony.luck@intel$(echo .)com \
--cc=uclinux-h8-devel@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.jp \
--cc=vgupta@synopsys$(echo .)com \
--cc=x86@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists$(echo .)xenproject.org \
--cc=ysato@users$(echo .)sourceforge.jp \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox