[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: [Xen-devel] Different: nr_pages vs. max_pfn
Keir, does Dom0 Linux do this for each Mini-OS instance that is spawned? If so then shouldn't the memory usage value in xm list for each PV guest take into account this additional usage of memory? i.e. 32MB + 8MB? Bhaskar. -----Original Message----- From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Keir Fraser Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 3:24 PM To: Y. D.; xen-devel Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Different: nr_pages vs. max_pfn The shared_info value is set up by the guest itself during boot. It's larger because Linux adds extra space at the end of its p2m map for backend drivers. -- Keir On 19/11/08 09:45, "Y. D." <duyuyang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > In start_info, there is a field nr_pages definig how much memory is allocated > to the domain, which is obvious. > While in shared_info, there is a field max_pfn. I don't know why max_pfn is > not equal to nr_pages. > Say for 32MB memory, nr_pages = 8192, while max_pfn = 10240 (may vary?), of > which 2048 pfn's have invalid mfn. > Can anybody explain that why max_pfn is larger? Is it static or dynamic? > Furture, does pfn to mfn frame mapping ever change? Hopefully not. > > Thanks, > Shawn > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |