On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 03:28:48PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

On Sunday 14 August 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 02:53:05PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

quoted

I thought that our discussion ended with the plan to use this only
for ARMv6+ (which has a problem with double mapping) but not on ARMv5
and below (which don't have this problem but might need dmabounce).

I thought we'd decided to have a pool of available CMA memory on ARMv6K
to satisfy atomic allocations, which can grow and shrink in size, rather
than setting aside a fixed amount of contiguous system memory.

Hmm, I don't remember the point about dynamically sizing the pool for
ARMv6K, but that can well be an oversight on my part.  I do remember the
part about taking that memory pool from the CMA region as you say.

If you're setting aside a pool of pages, then you have to dynamically
size it.  I did mention during our discussion about this.

The problem is that a pool of fixed size is two fold: you need it to be
sufficiently large that it can satisfy all allocations which come along
in atomic context.  Yet, we don't want the pool to be too large because
then it prevents the memory being used for other purposes.

Basically, the total number of pages in the pool can be a fixed size,
but as they are depleted through allocation, they need to be
re-populated from CMA to re-build the reserve for future atomic
allocations.  If the pool becomes larger via frees, then obviously
we need to give pages back.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>