From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Larry Bassel Subject: Re: how can I cleanly exclude memory from the kernel memory allocator? Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 16:40:40 -0700 Message-ID: <20110419234040.GG29359@labbmf-linux.qualcomm.com> References: <20110324221854.GA29359@labbmf-linux.qualcomm.com> <20110325173928.GD29359@labbmf-linux.qualcomm.com> <20110325202755.GA13574@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110419233336.GF29359@labbmf-linux.qualcomm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]:8198 "EHLO wolverine01.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752911Ab1DSXkm (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Apr 2011 19:40:42 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110419233336.GF29359@labbmf-linux.qualcomm.com> Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org To: Larry Bassel Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Russell King - ARM Linux , Nicolas Pitre On 19 Apr 11 16:33, Larry Bassel wrote: > On 25 Mar 11 20:27, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:39:28AM -0700, Larry Bassel wrote: > > > OK, please ignore my previous mail, I see that .fixup can be > > > used to adjust tags. It appears to me, however, that using a > > > .reserve function calling memblock_reserve will be an > > > easier way of doing what I need. > > > > Absolutely. > > Hopefully I'm just missing something obvious, but > when I call memblock_reserve (in .38) to reserve a block > of memory away from the general kernel memory pool, > I find that an ioremap of memory within the reserved block > still fails because pte_valid() is apparently true. I meant pfn_valid() not pte_valid() -- sorry. > > Is this intended behavior? If so, what would the > correct way of separating memory from the system be > so that there is no longer a 1-to-1 1M mapping for > this memory and ioremap (creating the *only* mapping > for this memory) is allowed? > > Thanks. > > Larry > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel > > -- > Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. > The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum. > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel -- Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: lbassel@codeaurora.org (Larry Bassel) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 16:40:40 -0700 Subject: how can I cleanly exclude memory from the kernel memory allocator? In-Reply-To: <20110419233336.GF29359@labbmf-linux.qualcomm.com> References: <20110324221854.GA29359@labbmf-linux.qualcomm.com> <20110325173928.GD29359@labbmf-linux.qualcomm.com> <20110325202755.GA13574@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110419233336.GF29359@labbmf-linux.qualcomm.com> Message-ID: <20110419234040.GG29359@labbmf-linux.qualcomm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 19 Apr 11 16:33, Larry Bassel wrote: > On 25 Mar 11 20:27, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:39:28AM -0700, Larry Bassel wrote: > > > OK, please ignore my previous mail, I see that .fixup can be > > > used to adjust tags. It appears to me, however, that using a > > > .reserve function calling memblock_reserve will be an > > > easier way of doing what I need. > > > > Absolutely. > > Hopefully I'm just missing something obvious, but > when I call memblock_reserve (in .38) to reserve a block > of memory away from the general kernel memory pool, > I find that an ioremap of memory within the reserved block > still fails because pte_valid() is apparently true. I meant pfn_valid() not pte_valid() -- sorry. > > Is this intended behavior? If so, what would the > correct way of separating memory from the system be > so that there is no longer a 1-to-1 1M mapping for > this memory and ioremap (creating the *only* mapping > for this memory) is allowed? > > Thanks. > > Larry > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > > linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org > > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel > > -- > Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. > The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum. > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel -- Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.