On 1/13/26 10:14 AM, [email protected] wrote: > On 2026-01-13 09:53, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >> On 1/12/26 9:13 PM, Barnabás Czémán wrote: >>> The device was crashing on high memory load because the reserved memory >>> ranges was wrongly defined. Correct the ranges for avoid the crashes. >>> Change the ramoops memory range to match with the values from the recovery >>> to be able to get the results from the device. >>> >>> Fixes: 9b1a6c925c88 ("arm64: dts: qcom: sm6125: Initial support for >>> xiaomi-ginkgo") >>> Signed-off-by: Barnabás Czémán <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125-xiaomi-ginkgo.dts | 44 >>> ++++++++++++++++------- >>> 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125-xiaomi-ginkgo.dts >>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125-xiaomi-ginkgo.dts >>> index bf03226a6f85..4c548cb5f253 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125-xiaomi-ginkgo.dts >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125-xiaomi-ginkgo.dts >>> @@ -13,6 +13,12 @@ >>> #include "sm6125.dtsi" >>> #include "pm6125.dtsi" >>> >>> +/delete-node/ &adsp_pil_mem; >>> +/delete-node/ &cont_splash_mem; >>> +/delete-node/ &gpu_mem; >>> +/delete-node/ &ipa_fw_mem; >>> +/delete-node/ &ipa_gsi_mem; >>> + >>> / { >>> model = "Xiaomi Redmi Note 8"; >>> compatible = "xiaomi,ginkgo", "qcom,sm6125"; >>> @@ -36,28 +42,42 @@ framebuffer0: framebuffer@5c000000 { >>> }; >>> >>> reserved-memory { >>> - debug_mem: debug@ffb00000 { >>> - reg = <0x0 0xffb00000 0x0 0xc0000>; >>> + adsp_pil_mem: adsp_pil_mem@55300000 { >>> + reg = <0x0 0x55300000 0x0 0x2200000>; >>> no-map; >>> }; >>> >>> - last_log_mem: lastlog@ffbc0000 { >>> - reg = <0x0 0xffbc0000 0x0 0x80000>; >>> + ipa_fw_mem: ipa_fw_mem@57500000 { >>> + reg = <0x0 0x57500000 0x0 0x10000>; >>> no-map; >>> }; >>> >>> - pstore_mem: ramoops@ffc00000 { >>> - compatible = "ramoops"; >>> - reg = <0x0 0xffc40000 0x0 0xc0000>; >>> - record-size = <0x1000>; >>> - console-size = <0x40000>; >>> - pmsg-size = <0x20000>; >>> + ipa_gsi_mem: ipa_gsi_mem@57510000 { >>> + reg = <0x0 0x57510000 0x0 0x5000>; >>> + no-map; >>> }; >>> >>> - cmdline_mem: memory@ffd00000 { >>> - reg = <0x0 0xffd40000 0x0 0x1000>; >>> + gpu_mem: gpu_mem@57515000 { >>> + reg = <0x0 0x57515000 0x0 0x2000>; >>> no-map; >>> }; >>> + >>> + framebuffer@5c000000 { >>> + reg = <0x0 0x5c000000 0x0 (2340 * 1080 * 4)>; >>> + no-map; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + /* >>> + * Matching with recovery values >>> + * to be able to get the results. >>> + */ >> >> /* This is an unnecessarily >> * squashed comment that could >> * easily go into a single line >> */ >> >> >>> + ramoops@61600000 { >>> + compatible = "ramoops"; >>> + reg = <0x0 0x61600000 0x0 0x400000>; >>> + record-size = <0x80000>; >>> + pmsg-size = <0x200000>; >>> + console-size = <0x100000>; >> >> Does your recovery image not specify ecc-size? > No. >> >> In my past experience, that led to much better results wrt the data >> being actually readable.. you might want to rebuild your recovery (or >> at least the dt and repack the boot.img) for that > I would not because i have got good results with this settings and > users could use already built recoveries to get the result.
Ok, no worries then Konrad
