Re: [PATCH] MIPS: fix memory reservation for non-usermem setups

[Thomas Bogendoerfer]

On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 07:02:13PM -0700, Ilya Lipnitskiy wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> 
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 11:33 PM Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ilya,
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 10:10:09PM -0700, Ilya Lipnitskiy wrote:
> > > Hi Thomas,
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 7:19 AM Thomas Bogendoerfer
> > > <tsbogend@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Mar 07, 2021 at 11:40:30AM -0800, Ilya Lipnitskiy wrote:
> > > > > From: Tobias Wolf <dev-NTEO@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > > Commit 67a3ba25aa95 ("MIPS: Fix incorrect mem=X@Y handling") introduced a new
> > > > > issue for rt288x where "PHYS_OFFSET" is 0x0 but the calculated "ramstart" is
> > > > > not. As the prerequisite of custom memory map has been removed, this results
> > > > > in the full memory range of 0x0 - 0x8000000 to be marked as reserved for this
> > > > > platform.
> > > >
> > > > and where is the problem here ?
> > > Turns out this was already attempted to be upstreamed - not clear why
> > > it wasn't merged. Context:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mips/6504517.U6H5IhoIOn@loki/
> > >
> > > I hope the thread above helps you understand the problem.
> >
> > The memory initialization was a bit different then. Do you still see the
> > same problem?
> Thanks for asking. I obtained a RT2880 device and gave it a try. It
> hangs at boot without this patch, however selecting

can you provide debug logs with memblock=debug for both good and bad
kernels ? I'm curious what's the reason for failing allocation...

Thomas.

-- 
Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a
good idea.                                                [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]