On Wed, 2019-07-31 at 18:07 +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:

On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 05:47:48PM +0200, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote:

quoted

diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
index 1c4ffabbe1cb..f5279ef85756 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c

@@ -50,6 +50,13 @@
 s64 memstart_addr __ro_after_init = -1;
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(memstart_addr);
 
+/*
+ * We might create both a ZONE_DMA and ZONE_DMA32. ZONE_DMA is needed if

there
+ * are periferals unable to address the first naturally aligned 4GB of ram.
+ * ZONE_DMA32 will be expanded to cover the rest of that memory. If such
+ * limitations doesn't exist only ZONE_DMA32 is created.
+ */

Shouldn't we instead only create ZONE_DMA to cover the whole 32-bit
range and leave ZONE_DMA32 empty? Can__GFP_DMA allocations fall back
onto ZONE_DMA32?

Hi Catalin, thanks for the review.

You're right, the GFP_DMA page allocation will fail with a nasty dmesg error if
ZONE_DMA is configured but empty. Unsurprisingly the opposite situation is fine
(GFP_DMA32 with an empty ZONE_DMA32).

I switched to the scheme you're suggesting for the next version of the series.
The comment will be something the likes of this:

/*
 * We create both a ZONE_DMA and ZONE_DMA32. ZONE_DMA's size is decided based
 * on whether the SoC's peripherals are able to address the first naturally
 * aligned 4 GB of ram.
 *
 * If limited, ZONE_DMA covers that area and ZONE_DMA32 the rest of that 32 bit
 * addressable memory.
 *
 * If not ZONE_DMA is expanded to cover the whole 32 bit addressable memory and
 * ZONE_DMA32 is left empty.
 */

 Regards,
 Nicolas