| Message ID | 20240606090609.3199-1-jason-ch.chen@mediatek.corp-partner.google.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | remoteproc: mediatek: Increase MT8188 SCP core0 DRAM size | expand |
Il 06/06/24 11:06, jason-ch chen ha scritto: > From: Jason Chen <Jason-ch.Chen@mediatek.com> > > Increase MT8188 SCP core0 DRAM size for HEVC driver. > ....so the second core only gets a maximum of 0x200000 of SRAM? I'm not sure how useful is the secondary SCP core, at this point, with so little available SRAM but... okay, as you wish. Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com> > Signed-off-by: Jason Chen <Jason-ch.Chen@mediatek.com> > --- > drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c > index b885a9a041e4..2119fc62c3f2 100644 > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c > @@ -1390,7 +1390,7 @@ static const struct mtk_scp_sizes_data default_scp_sizes = { > }; > > static const struct mtk_scp_sizes_data mt8188_scp_sizes = { > - .max_dram_size = 0x500000, > + .max_dram_size = 0x800000, > .ipi_share_buffer_size = 600, > }; >
On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 01:00:11PM +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote: > Il 06/06/24 11:06, jason-ch chen ha scritto: > > From: Jason Chen <Jason-ch.Chen@mediatek.com> > > > > Increase MT8188 SCP core0 DRAM size for HEVC driver. This is telling me _what_ gets done rather than _why_ it gets done. > > > > ....so the second core only gets a maximum of 0x200000 of SRAM? > I'm not sure how useful is the secondary SCP core, at this point, with so little > available SRAM but... okay, as you wish. > > Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Chen <Jason-ch.Chen@mediatek.com> > > --- > > drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c > > index b885a9a041e4..2119fc62c3f2 100644 > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c > > @@ -1390,7 +1390,7 @@ static const struct mtk_scp_sizes_data default_scp_sizes = { > > }; > > static const struct mtk_scp_sizes_data mt8188_scp_sizes = { > > - .max_dram_size = 0x500000, > > + .max_dram_size = 0x800000, Do you require to fix a "reserved-memory" node in a device tree file to account for this? Thanks, Mathieu > > .ipi_share_buffer_size = 600, > > }; > >
Hi Mathieu, Sorry for the late response. On Mon, 2024-06-10 at 10:34 -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > > External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until > you have verified the sender or the content. > On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 01:00:11PM +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno > wrote: > > Il 06/06/24 11:06, jason-ch chen ha scritto: > > > From: Jason Chen <Jason-ch.Chen@mediatek.com> > > > > > > Increase MT8188 SCP core0 DRAM size for HEVC driver. > > This is telling me _what_ gets done rather than _why_ it gets done. > I will modify the commit message in the next version. > > > > > > > ....so the second core only gets a maximum of 0x200000 of SRAM? > > I'm not sure how useful is the secondary SCP core, at this point, > with so little > > available SRAM but... okay, as you wish. > > > > Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno < > angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Chen <Jason-ch.Chen@mediatek.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c > b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c > > > index b885a9a041e4..2119fc62c3f2 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c > > > +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c > > > @@ -1390,7 +1390,7 @@ static const struct mtk_scp_sizes_data > default_scp_sizes = { > > > }; > > > static const struct mtk_scp_sizes_data mt8188_scp_sizes = { > > > -.max_dram_size = 0x500000, > > > +.max_dram_size = 0x800000, > > Do you require to fix a "reserved-memory" node in a device tree file > to account > for this? Using a "reserved-memory" node to calculate max_dram_size presents challenges due to alignment requirements in dma_alloc_coherent(). For example, static const struct mtk_scp_sizes_data mt8188_scp_c1_sizes = { .max_dram_size = 0xA00000, .ipi_share_buffer_size = 600, }; We require 2560 pages (10M) for SCP core1 usage, but alignment constraints necessitate searching for a free region of 2^12 pages (16M). This misalignment between the reserved 10M and the required 16M prevents successful allocation. Adjusting the reserved memory to 16M for core1 would lead to a 6M wastage. To avoid this, reserving a larger memory block is advisable. This block can be partially used by SCP core1, with the remainder allocated to feature drivers. Consequently, setting the max_dram_size in SCP configurations is a practical solution to meet these requirements. Thanks, Jason > > Thanks, > Mathieu > > > > .ipi_share_buffer_size = 600, > > > }; > > > >
diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c index b885a9a041e4..2119fc62c3f2 100644 --- a/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/mtk_scp.c @@ -1390,7 +1390,7 @@ static const struct mtk_scp_sizes_data default_scp_sizes = { }; static const struct mtk_scp_sizes_data mt8188_scp_sizes = { - .max_dram_size = 0x500000, + .max_dram_size = 0x800000, .ipi_share_buffer_size = 600, };