From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nishanth Menon Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] DSPBRIDGE: Increased DMM size to 256MB Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 08:28:11 -0600 Message-ID: <4B4740FB.6040403@ti.com> References: <1262912435-30024-1-git-send-email-omar.ramirez@ti.com> <4B4695CB.4080606@ti.com> <8F7AF80515AF0D4D93307E594F3CB40E43C043AC@dlee03.ent.ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bear.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.41]:45796 "EHLO bear.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752171Ab0AHO2Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:28:16 -0500 In-Reply-To: <8F7AF80515AF0D4D93307E594F3CB40E43C043AC@dlee03.ent.ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: "Kanigeri, Hari" Cc: "Ramirez Luna, Omar" , linux-omap , Hiroshi Doyu , Ameya Palande , Felipe Contreras , "Guzman Lugo, Fernando" , "Ramos Falcon, Ernesto" , "Aguilar Pena, Leed" Kanigeri, Hari had written, on 01/07/2010 11:16 PM, the following: > Nishant, > > With 64MB we were seeing cases of running out of DSP virtual memory when running multiple Multimedia use cases in parallel at a time. Would it be better that we make this as a board specific memory requirement? not all boards will have the same needs right? > > Thank you, > Best regards, > Hari > > -----Original Message----- > From: Menon, Nishanth > Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 7:48 AM > To: Ramirez Luna, Omar > Cc: linux-omap; Hiroshi Doyu; Ameya Palande; Felipe Contreras; Guzman Lugo, Fernando; Ramos Falcon, Ernesto; Kanigeri, Hari; Aguilar Pena, Leed > Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] DSPBRIDGE: Increased DMM size to 256MB > > Ramirez Luna, Omar had written, on 01/07/2010 07:00 PM, the following: >> From: Hari Kanigeri >> >> This patch increases the DMM from 64MB to 256MB. > > begs the question: Why? > >> Signed-off-by: Hari Kanigeri >> Signed-off-by: Omar Ramirez Luna >> Signed-off-by: Leed Aguilar >> --- >> arch/arm/plat-omap/include/dspbridge/dmm.h | 2 +- >> drivers/dsp/bridge/pmgr/dmm.c | 8 ++++---- >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/dspbridge/dmm.h b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/dspbridge/dmm.h >> index 335edf8..af0c35a 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/dspbridge/dmm.h >> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/dspbridge/dmm.h >> @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ >> u32 reserved; >> } ; >> >> -#define DMMPOOLSIZE 0x4000000 >> +#define DMMPOOLSIZE 0x10000000 >> >> /* >> * ======== DMM_GetHandle ======== >> diff --git a/drivers/dsp/bridge/pmgr/dmm.c b/drivers/dsp/bridge/pmgr/dmm.c >> index 46c05c6..f878855 100644 >> --- a/drivers/dsp/bridge/pmgr/dmm.c >> +++ b/drivers/dsp/bridge/pmgr/dmm.c >> @@ -103,10 +103,10 @@ static struct GT_Mask DMM_debugMask = { NULL, NULL }; /* GT trace variable */ >> >> static u32 cRefs; /* module reference count */ >> struct MapPage { >> - u32 RegionSize:15; >> - u32 MappedSize:15; >> - u32 bReserved:1; >> - u32 bMapped:1; >> + u64 RegionSize:31; >> + u64 MappedSize:31; >> + u64 bReserved:1; >> + u64 bMapped:1; this does not make much sense meanwhile.. what does this have to do with the dmmpool size increase and what are these unused fields being used for? >> }; >> >> /* Create the free list */ > > -- Regards, Nishanth Menon