From: Tony Prisk <linux@prisktech.co.nz>
To: linux--arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, dwmw2@infradead.org
Subject: NAND buffer allocation fails
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 21:03:26 +1200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51B1A1DE.3020603@prisktech.co.nz> (raw)
Could someone explain why the following situation might occur:
In drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c, we have:
int nand_scan_tail(struct mtd_info *mtd)
{
int i;
struct nand_chip *chip = mtd->priv;
/* New bad blocks should be marked in OOB, flash-based BBT, or both */
BUG_ON((chip->bbt_options & NAND_BBT_NO_OOB_BBM) &&
!(chip->bbt_options & NAND_BBT_USE_FLASH));
if (!(chip->options & NAND_OWN_BUFFERS))
chip->buffers = kmalloc(sizeof(*chip->buffers), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!chip->buffers)
return -ENOMEM;
...
For some reason, the kmalloc always fails on my configuration/hardware
(arch-vt8500: WonderMedia/VIA APC8750).
The strange thing is that if I add the NAND_OWN_BUFFERS option, and
allocate my own buffers in the driver probe everything is fine.
Driver probe code below:
priv->nand.buffers = devm_kzalloc(priv->dev,
sizeof(*priv->nand.buffers), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!priv->nand.buffers) {
dev_err(priv->dev, "failed to allocate NAND buffers\n");
return -ENOMEM;
}
The devm_kzalloc does occur earlier than the nand_scan_tail alloc would
have, but there doesn't appear to be a shortage of memory on the
platform so I don't think it's failing for a memory shortage.
Is there any real difference between using kmalloc and devm_kzalloc to
allocate the buffer (other than the obvious 0'ing of the buffer)?
Why would one call fail and the other succeed?
Regards
Tony Prisk
next reply other threads:[~2013-06-07 9:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-07 9:03 Tony Prisk [this message]
2013-06-07 9:07 ` NAND buffer allocation fails Tony Prisk
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=51B1A1DE.3020603@prisktech.co.nz \
--to=linux@prisktech.co.nz \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux--arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox