[U-Boot] [PATCH 0/1] Extend malloc() pool for Zynq devices

[U-Boot] [PATCH 0/1] Extend malloc() pool for Zynq devices

[Anton Gerasimov]

I'm getting -ENOMEM on Z-Turn board already, other boards are probably
still allright if no one complains, but might hit the limit soon.

Anton Gerasimov (1):
  zynq: Kconfig: extend the bootstrap malloc() pool

 arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

-- 
2.19.0

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/1] zynq: Kconfig: extend the bootstrap malloc() pool

[Anton Gerasimov]

Signed-off-by: Anton Gerasimov <tossel@gmail.com>
---
 arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig
index a599ed63ee..21dfebf5c0 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ config SYS_CONFIG_NAME
 	  will be used for board configuration.
 
 config SYS_MALLOC_F_LEN
-	default 0x600
+	default 0x800
 
 config SYS_MALLOC_LEN
 	default 0x1400000
-- 
2.19.0

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/1] zynq: Kconfig: extend the bootstrap malloc() pool

[Michal Simek]

On 20. 12. 18 22:57, Anton Gerasimov wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Anton Gerasimov <tossel@gmail.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig
> index a599ed63ee..21dfebf5c0 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig
> @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ config SYS_CONFIG_NAME
>  	  will be used for board configuration.
>  
>  config SYS_MALLOC_F_LEN
> -	default 0x600
> +	default 0x800
>  
>  config SYS_MALLOC_LEN
>  	default 0x1400000
> 

I have not a problem with this change but it has to be done based on
more information. It means you should look what requires that memory
and if make sense that these components need it at that time.

Note: in v2 please write reasonable commit message directly to the patch
too.

Thanks,
Michal

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/1] zynq: Kconfig: extend the bootstrap malloc() pool

[Anton Gerasimov]

> I have not a problem with this change but it has to be done based on
> more information. It means you should look what requires that memory
> and if make sense that these components need it at that time.

Thank you for  the advice, that was quite fruitful. So most of the
heap (0x5f4 of 0x600) before the relocation is being consumed in
device_bind_common function which binds device tree entries to
the drivers.

If I remove 'u-boot,dm-pre-alloc' from uart0 node, that is not
being used as far as I can see, it drops to 0x5a0, which lets the board
boot, but still looks pretty tight. So maybe it's worth extending the heap
anyway unless you need more information to take the decision.

Thanks,
Anton

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/1] zynq: Kconfig: extend the bootstrap malloc() pool

[Michal Simek]

On 21. 12. 18 11:39, Anton Gerasimov wrote:
>> I have not a problem with this change but it has to be done based on
>> more information. It means you should look what requires that memory
>> and if make sense that these components need it at that time.
> 
> Thank you for  the advice, that was quite fruitful. So most of the
> heap (0x5f4 of 0x600) before the relocation is being consumed in
> device_bind_common function which binds device tree entries to
> the drivers.
> 
> If I remove 'u-boot,dm-pre-alloc' from uart0 node, that is not
> being used as far as I can see, it drops to 0x5a0, which lets the board
> boot, but still looks pretty tight. So maybe it's worth extending the heap
> anyway unless you need more information to take the decision.

I understand all of this but will be good to know what consumes that
0x5xx space and if we mark nodes properly that maybe something is not
used and we should remove that marking.

It means expected data is that uarts consumes 0xXXX, axi 0xXXX, sd
0xXXX, etc.

Thanks,
Michal

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/1] zynq: Kconfig: extend the bootstrap malloc() pool

[Anton Gerasimov]

Hi Michal,

> I understand all of this but will be good to know what consumes that
> 0x5xx space and if we mark nodes properly that maybe something is not
> used and we should remove that marking.
>
> It means expected data is that uarts consumes 0xXXX, axi 0xXXX, sd
> 0xXXX, etc.

measuring only the memory consumed in device_bind_common, I've got
the following results (in decimal):

   root_driver:               108
   mod_exp_sw:                108
   amba:                      120
   serial at e0000000 aka uart0: 112
   serial at e0001000 aka uart1: 88
   spi at e000d000 aka qspi:     120
   sdhci at e0100000 aka mmc0:   455
   sdhci at e0100000.blk:        208
   slcr at f8000000:             96
   clkc at 100:                  72
   (total)                    1487 = 0x5cf of 0x600

So the most memory is being consumed by mmc0 (not quite sure what is
this '.blk' device, but it is probably also required), but it's not
dominating, other seemingly useful devices also have a decent share.

Thanks,
Anton

[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/1] zynq: Kconfig: extend the bootstrap malloc() pool

[Michal Simek]

Hi,

On 20. 01. 19 12:29, Anton Gerasimov wrote:
> Hi Michal,
> 
>> I understand all of this but will be good to know what consumes that
>> 0x5xx space and if we mark nodes properly that maybe something is not
>> used and we should remove that marking.
>>
>> It means expected data is that uarts consumes 0xXXX, axi 0xXXX, sd
>> 0xXXX, etc.
> 
> measuring only the memory consumed in device_bind_common, I've got
> the following results (in decimal):
> 
>   root_driver:               108
>   mod_exp_sw:                108
>   amba:                      120
>   serial at e0000000 aka uart0: 112
>   serial at e0001000 aka uart1: 88
>   spi at e000d000 aka qspi:     120
>   sdhci at e0100000 aka mmc0:   455
>   sdhci at e0100000.blk:        208
>   slcr at f8000000:             96
>   clkc at 100:                  72
>   (total)                    1487 = 0x5cf of 0x600
> 
> So the most memory is being consumed by mmc0 (not quite sure what is
> this '.blk' device, but it is probably also required), but it's not
> dominating, other seemingly useful devices also have a decent share.

ok. Thanks for this list. I have extended that commit message with this
and applied. We can look at these separately to find out if we can tune
it a little bit.

Thanks,
Michal

[U-Boot] [PATCHv2] zynq: Kconfig: extend the bootstrap malloc() pool

[Anton Gerasimov]

Most of the memory is being consumed by device binding code,
more space needed for other data structures.

Z-turn board has already hit the limit, others may follow soon.

Signed-off-by: Anton Gerasimov <tossel@gmail.com>
---
 arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig
index a599ed63ee..21dfebf5c0 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-zynq/Kconfig
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ config SYS_CONFIG_NAME
 	  will be used for board configuration.
 
 config SYS_MALLOC_F_LEN
-	default 0x600
+	default 0x800
 
 config SYS_MALLOC_LEN
 	default 0x1400000
-- 
2.19.0