Re: [PATCH v3] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: Shrink command/event/PRI queues in kdump kernel

On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 11:16:10AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 06, 2026 at 09:47:08AM +0100, Kiryl Shutsemau (Meta) wrote:
> > All SMMU queues are sized from the maxima the hardware advertises in IDR1,
> > which can be several megabytes each, and are allocated at probe. The kdump
> > kernel already disables the event and PRI queues (arm_smmu_device_reset()
> > drops CR0_EVTQEN/CR0_PRIQEN) but still allocates them at full size. On
> > systems with many SMMUv3 instances that cost is paid per instance and adds
> > up to tens of megabytes of coherent DMA in the capture kernel.
> > 
> > A kdump capture kernel runs from a small crashkernel reservation and only
> > has to drive the few devices used to save the dump, so deep queues serve
> > no purpose. The queues are not on the DMA data path, so dump throughput is
> > unaffected; a shallower command queue only bounds how many commands may be
> > in flight before a sync, which does not matter for the capture kernel's
> > small device count and modest I/O.
> > 
> > Clamp every queue to a single page when is_kdump_kernel() is true. Doing
> > it in arm_smmu_init_one_queue() covers the command, event and PRI queues
> > in one place. The command queue still holds at least one batch plus a sync
> > (256 entries on a 4K-page kernel, well above CMDQ_BATCH_ENTRIES), so
> > command batching keeps working.
> 
> Wouldn't we be better of not allocating unused queues in the first place?
> That's what this patch does:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/0b035c53cb401acde8244b805d4b6a0312b83708.1782799827.git.nicolinc@nvidia.com

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I couldn't find the allocation change in
there. That patch seems to only touch arm_smmu_device_reset() -- skipping
the EVTQ/PRIQ base/prod/cons writes and the CR0_EVTQEN/CR0_PRIQEN enables
instead of the current enable-then-mask-out.

I went through the rest of the series too and didn't see
arm_smmu_init_queues() or arm_smmu_init_one_queue() touched anywhere, so
as far as I can tell the kdump kernel still allocates full-size
evtq/priq, and the cmdq is not affected either.

Is the allocation side handled somewhere else that I've missed?

> so help reviewing that series would be much appreciated!
> 
> If you want to reduce the cmdq size, I'd prefer a cmdline option rather
> than special-casing kdump (as I've had other folks ask about configuring
> the cmdq size for other reasons).

Fair enough for the cmdq. I'm less sure what to do about evtq/priq: they
get disabled in the kdump kernel anyway, so I don't know what a size knob
would mean for them, other than every kdump config having to pass it to
get back the memory.

Would skipping their allocation when is_kdump_kernel() be acceptable on
its own, or would you rather see it done differently?

-- 
  Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov