From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Anup Patel <Anup.Patel@wdc.com>
Cc: Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Atish Patra <Atish.Patra@wdc.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
"linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] RISC-V: Fix Maximum Physical Memory 2GiB option for 64bit systems
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2019 22:54:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190405055421.GA7087@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190405054909.3238-1-anup.patel@wdc.com>
On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 05:49:34AM +0000, Anup Patel wrote:
> The Maximum Physical Memory 2GiB option for 64bit systems is currently
> broken because kernel hangs at boot-time when this option is enabled
> and the underlying system has more than 2GiB memory.
>
> This issue can be easily reproduced on SiFive Unleashed board where
> we have 8GiB of memory.
>
> This patch fixes above issue by removing unusable memory region in
> setup_bootmem().
>
> Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <anup.patel@wdc.com>
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Btw, what is the rationale behind even offering the 2GiB option and
the medlow model on 64-bit? Do we reall have use cases where the
slightly more effient generated code matters so much to keep up
the support burden of this mostly unused and unusual configuration?
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Anup Patel <Anup.Patel@wdc.com>
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
Atish Patra <Atish.Patra@wdc.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>,
"linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] RISC-V: Fix Maximum Physical Memory 2GiB option for 64bit systems
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2019 22:54:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190405055421.GA7087@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190405054909.3238-1-anup.patel@wdc.com>
On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 05:49:34AM +0000, Anup Patel wrote:
> The Maximum Physical Memory 2GiB option for 64bit systems is currently
> broken because kernel hangs at boot-time when this option is enabled
> and the underlying system has more than 2GiB memory.
>
> This issue can be easily reproduced on SiFive Unleashed board where
> we have 8GiB of memory.
>
> This patch fixes above issue by removing unusable memory region in
> setup_bootmem().
>
> Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <anup.patel@wdc.com>
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Btw, what is the rationale behind even offering the 2GiB option and
the medlow model on 64-bit? Do we reall have use cases where the
slightly more effient generated code matters so much to keep up
the support burden of this mostly unused and unusual configuration?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-05 5:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-05 5:49 [PATCH v3] RISC-V: Fix Maximum Physical Memory 2GiB option for 64bit systems Anup Patel
2019-04-05 5:49 ` Anup Patel
2019-04-05 5:54 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2019-04-05 5:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-04-05 6:01 ` Anup Patel
2019-04-05 6:01 ` Anup Patel
2019-04-05 21:17 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2019-04-05 21:17 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2019-04-07 12:59 ` Anup Patel
2019-04-07 12:59 ` Anup Patel
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=20190405055421.GA7087@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=Anup.Patel@wdc.com \
--cc=Atish.Patra@wdc.com \
--cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=palmer@sifive.com \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
--cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.