[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [V10 PATCH 0/4] pvh dom0 patches...
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 06:13:51PM +0200, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On 02/05/14 17:41, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>>> On 02.05.14 at 16:35, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 02/05/14 16:16, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>>>>> On 02.05.14 at 16:06, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> My bad, I've incorrectly printed this as 0x%lu instead of %lx, the > >>>> following output is correct: > >>>> > >>>> SMAP type=01 base=0000000000000000 len=0000000000092400 > >>>> SMAP type=02 base=00000000000f0000 len=0000000000010000 > >>>> SMAP type=01 base=0000000000100000 len=000000003ff6e000 > >>>> SMAP type=04 base=00000000dfdf9c00 len=0000000000052000 > >>>> SMAP type=03 base=00000000dfe4bc00 len=0000000000002000 > >>>> SMAP type=02 base=00000000dfe4dc00 len=00000000001b2400 > >>>> SMAP type=02 base=00000000f8000000 len=0000000005000000 > >>>> SMAP type=02 base=00000000fe000000 len=0000000000d00400 > >>>> SMAP type=02 base=00000000fee00000 len=0000000000100000 > >>>> SMAP type=02 base=00000000ffb00000 len=0000000000500000 > >>>> SMAP type=02 base=0000000100000000 len=00000000a0000000 > > > > Considering the hypervisor view below, this range clearly is then > > wrong here too, ... > > > >> Maybe the problem is on FreeBSD, and I'm not correctly clamping the e820 > >> memory map returned by Xen. Right now I'm using start_info->nr_pages as > >> the number of valid RAM pages assigned to Dom0, but it is not clear if > >> start_info->nr_pages also takes into account the holes and invalid > >> regions in the e820 memory map. > > > > i.e. yes, there must be some kind of problem in your handling in any > > case. > > > >> This is the hw memory map reported by Xen: > >> > >> (XEN) Xen-e820 RAM map: > >> (XEN) 0000000000000000 - 0000000000092400 (usable) > >> (XEN) 00000000000f0000 - 0000000000100000 (reserved) > >> (XEN) 0000000000100000 - 00000000dfdf9c00 (usable) > >> (XEN) 00000000dfdf9c00 - 00000000dfe4bc00 (ACPI NVS) > >> (XEN) 00000000dfe4bc00 - 00000000dfe4dc00 (ACPI data) > >> (XEN) 00000000dfe4dc00 - 00000000e0000000 (reserved) > >> (XEN) 00000000f8000000 - 00000000fd000000 (reserved) > >> (XEN) 00000000fe000000 - 00000000fed00400 (reserved) > >> (XEN) 00000000fee00000 - 00000000fef00000 (reserved) > >> (XEN) 00000000ffb00000 - 0000000100000000 (reserved) > >> (XEN) 0000000100000000 - 00000001a0000000 (usable) > >> > >> And the Dom0 is assigned 1024M of RAM. > > > > I.e. it can have pages at or beyond 0x40000000 only if some other > > region is unpopulated. > > If I got this right, it means that the maximum populated gpfn on the > domain is (start_info->nr_pages << PAGE_SHIFT), which is kind of odd, So it is -1ULL without any dom0_mem=max:X arguments but if you use dom0_mem=max:X it has a sensible value? If you use 'dom0_mem=max:1GB" the nr_pages should be 262144. > because on PVH Dom0 all the holes in the memory map are already set to > p2m_mmio_direct (see pvh_map_all_iomem in patch 1), so I don't think > there's anything I can unpopulate, and it means that the dom0_mem param > passed in the command line is not properly handled, because the actual > usable RAM assigned to the Dom0 will vary depending on the underlying > hardware e820 map. Right. The nr_pages will only correspond to the E820_RAM regions. > > Roger. > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |