From: Kiryl Shutsemau <kas@kernel.org>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
Nicolin Chen <nicolinc@nvidia.com>,
Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>,
Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>, Kyle McMartin <jkkm@meta.com>,
Usama Arif <usama.arif@linux.dev>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Shrink command/event/PRI queues in kdump kernel
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2026 14:53:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <amiz6GQZ-XGlH706@thinkstation> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <amiBagGKn-Aym1DK@willie-the-truck>
On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 11:16:10AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 06, 2026 at 09:47:08AM +0100, Kiryl Shutsemau (Meta) wrote:
> > All SMMU queues are sized from the maxima the hardware advertises in IDR1,
> > which can be several megabytes each, and are allocated at probe. The kdump
> > kernel already disables the event and PRI queues (arm_smmu_device_reset()
> > drops CR0_EVTQEN/CR0_PRIQEN) but still allocates them at full size. On
> > systems with many SMMUv3 instances that cost is paid per instance and adds
> > up to tens of megabytes of coherent DMA in the capture kernel.
> >
> > A kdump capture kernel runs from a small crashkernel reservation and only
> > has to drive the few devices used to save the dump, so deep queues serve
> > no purpose. The queues are not on the DMA data path, so dump throughput is
> > unaffected; a shallower command queue only bounds how many commands may be
> > in flight before a sync, which does not matter for the capture kernel's
> > small device count and modest I/O.
> >
> > Clamp every queue to a single page when is_kdump_kernel() is true. Doing
> > it in arm_smmu_init_one_queue() covers the command, event and PRI queues
> > in one place. The command queue still holds at least one batch plus a sync
> > (256 entries on a 4K-page kernel, well above CMDQ_BATCH_ENTRIES), so
> > command batching keeps working.
>
> Wouldn't we be better of not allocating unused queues in the first place?
> That's what this patch does:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/0b035c53cb401acde8244b805d4b6a0312b83708.1782799827.git.nicolinc@nvidia.com
Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I couldn't find the allocation change in
there. That patch seems to only touch arm_smmu_device_reset() -- skipping
the EVTQ/PRIQ base/prod/cons writes and the CR0_EVTQEN/CR0_PRIQEN enables
instead of the current enable-then-mask-out.
I went through the rest of the series too and didn't see
arm_smmu_init_queues() or arm_smmu_init_one_queue() touched anywhere, so
as far as I can tell the kdump kernel still allocates full-size
evtq/priq, and the cmdq is not affected either.
Is the allocation side handled somewhere else that I've missed?
> so help reviewing that series would be much appreciated!
>
> If you want to reduce the cmdq size, I'd prefer a cmdline option rather
> than special-casing kdump (as I've had other folks ask about configuring
> the cmdq size for other reasons).
Fair enough for the cmdq. I'm less sure what to do about evtq/priq: they
get disabled in the kdump kernel anyway, so I don't know what a size knob
would mean for them, other than every kdump config having to pass it to
get back the memory.
Would skipping their allocation when is_kdump_kernel() be acceptable on
its own, or would you rather see it done differently?
--
Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-28 13:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-06 8:47 [PATCH v3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Shrink command/event/PRI queues in kdump kernel Kiryl Shutsemau (Meta)
2026-07-15 11:46 ` Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-07-27 9:30 ` Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-07-28 10:16 ` Will Deacon
2026-07-28 13:53 ` Kiryl Shutsemau [this message]
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=amiz6GQZ-XGlH706@thinkstation \
--to=kas@kernel.org \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=jkkm@meta.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=praan@google.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=usama.arif@linux.dev \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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.