[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/2] xen/mmu: Add workaround "x86-64, mm: Put early page table high"
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 01:55:22PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Wed, 4 May 2011, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 09:51:41PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > > On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 11:12:06AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 02:55:27AM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote: > > > > > On Mon, May 02, 2011 at 01:22:21PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > > > I think that (Stefano please confirm or not) this patch was prepared > > > > > as workaround for similar issues. However, I do not like this patch > > > > > because on systems with small amount of memory it leaves huge (to some > > > > > extent) hole between max_low_pfn and 4G. Additionally, it affects > > > > > memory hotplug a bit because it allocates memory starting from current > > > > > max_mfn. It also breaks memory hotplug on i386 (maybe also others > > > > > thinks, however, I could not confirm that). If it stay for some > > > > > reason it should be amended in follwing way: > > > > > > > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32 > > > > > xen_extra_mem_start = mem_end; > > > > > #else > > > > > xen_extra_mem_start = max((1ULL << 32), mem_end); > > > > > #endif > > > > > > > > > > Regarding comment for this patch it should be mentioned that without > > > > > this > > > > > patch e820_end_of_low_ram_pfn() is not broken. It is not called > > > > > simply. > > > > > > > > > > Last but least. I found that memory sizes below and including exactly > > > > > 1 GiB and > > > > > exactly 2 GiB, 3 GiB (maybe higher, i.e. 4 GiB, 5 GiB, ...; I was not > > > > > able to test > > > > > them because I do not have sufficient memory) are magic. It means > > > > > that if memory > > > > > is set with those sizes everything is working good (without > > > > > 4b239f458c229de044d6905c2b0f9fe16ed9e01e > > > > > and 24bdb0b62cc82120924762ae6bc85afc8c3f2b26 applied). It means that > > > > > domU > > > > > should be tested with sizes which are not power of two nor multiple > > > > > of that. > > > > > > > > Hmm, I thought I did test 1500M. > > > > > > It does not work on my machine (24bdb0b62cc82120924762ae6bc85afc8c3f2b26 > > > removed and 4b239f458c229de044d6905c2b0f9fe16ed9e01e applied). > > > > It does not work on my machine (x86_64) with Linux Kernel Ver. 2.6.39-rc6 > > without > > git commit 24bdb0b62cc82120924762ae6bc85afc8c3f2b26 (xen: do not create the > > extra > > e820 region at an addr lower than 4G). As I said ealier bug introduced by > > git > > commit 4b239f458c229de044d6905c2b0f9fe16ed9e01e (x86-64, mm: Put early page > > table > > high) is probably hidden (repaird/workarounded ???) by git commit > > 24bdb0b62cc82120924762ae6bc85afc8c3f2b26 (xen: do not create the extra > > e820 region at an addr lower than 4G). > > > > Konrad, Stefano could you confirm that ??? If it is true > > how could I help you in removing this bug ??? > > The reason why "xen: do not create the extra e820 region at an addr > lower than 4G" is needed is the following: > > starting the extra memory region at an address lower than 4G is > dangerous because if the extra memory region spans the 4G boundary then > e820_end_of_ram_pfn will get confused and return 0x100000000, therefore > init_memory_mapping will setup 1:1 mapping for 0-0x100000000, including > the whole 3G-4G range. > Of course this is wrong because among other things will cause the kernel > to remap the IOAPIC MMIO registers that should go through the fixmap > instead. > I don't think "x86-64, mm: Put early page table high" is related to the > bug that this commit is trying to solve. > > Could you please explain in details what problems do this patch create? > > In any case you are right about the fact that the change is not needed > on X86_32 so if it has any bad side effects on X86_32 we can always do Why not? Can't you boot a 32-bit Dom0 on those machines? > the following, like you suggested: > > diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/setup.c b/arch/x86/xen/setup.c > index 90bac0a..721f576 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/xen/setup.c > +++ b/arch/x86/xen/setup.c > @@ -227,7 +227,11 @@ char * __init xen_memory_setup(void) > > memcpy(map_raw, map, sizeof(map)); > e820.nr_map = 0; > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32 > + xen_extra_mem_start = mem_end; > +#else > xen_extra_mem_start = max((1ULL << 32), mem_end); > +#endif > for (i = 0; i < memmap.nr_entries; i++) { > unsigned long long end; > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |