[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] xen: eliminate scalability issues from initial mapping setup
On 05/09/14 08:55, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 09/04/2014 04:43 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 04/09/14 15:31, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>>> On 04.09.14 at 15:02, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On 04/09/14 13:59, David Vrabel wrote: >>>>> On 04/09/14 13:38, Juergen Gross wrote: >>>>>> Direct Xen to place the initial P->M table outside of the initial >>>>>> mapping, as otherwise the 1G (implementation) / 2G (theoretical) >>>>>> restriction on the size of the initial mapping limits the amount >>>>>> of memory a domain can be handed initially. >>>>> The three level p2m limits memory to 512 GiB on x86-64 but this patch >>>>> doesn't seem to address this limit and thus seems a bit useless to >>>>> me. >>>> Any increase of the p2m beyond 3 levels will need to come with >>>> substantial libxc changes first. 3 level p2ms are hard coded >>>> throughout >>>> all the PV build and migrate code. >>> No, there no such dependency - the kernel could use 4 levels at >>> any time (sacrificing being able to get migrated), making sure it >>> only exposes the 3 levels hanging off the fourth level (or not >>> exposing this information at all) to external entities making this >>> wrong assumption. >>> >>> Jan >>> >> >> That would require that the PV kernel must start with a 3 level p2m and >> fudge things afterwards. > > I always thought the 3 level p2m is constructed by the kernel, not by > the tools. > > It starts with the linear p2m list anchored at xen_start_info->mfn_list, > constructs the p2m tree and writes the p2m_top_mfn mfn to > HYPERVISOR_shared_info->arch.pfn_to_mfn_frame_list_list > > See comment in the kernel source arch/x86/xen/p2m.c > > So booting with a larger p2m list can be handled completely by the > kernel itself. Ah yes - I remember now. All the toolstack does is create the linear p2m. In which case building such a domain will be fine. > >> >> At a minimum, I would expect a patch to libxc to detect a 4 level PV >> guest and fail with a meaningful error, rather than an obscure "m2p >> doesn't match p2m for mfn/pfn X". > > I'd rather fix it in a clean way. > > I think the best way to do it would be an indicator in the p2m array > anchor, e.g. setting 1<<61 in pfn_to_mfn_frame_list_list. This will > result in an early error with old tools: > "Couldn't map p2m_frame_list_list" No it wont. The is_mapped() macro in the toolstack is quite broken. It stems from a lack of Design/API/ABI concerning things like the p2m. In particular, INVALID_MFN is not an ABI constant, nor is any notion of mapped vs unmapped. Its current implementation is a relic of 32bit days, and only checks bit 31. It also means that it is impossible to migrate a PV VM with pfns above the 43bit limit; a restriction which is lifted by my migration v2 series. A lot of the other migration constructs are in a similar state, which is why they are being deleted by the v2 series. The clean way to fix this is to leave pfn_to_mfn_frame_list_list as INVALID_MFN. Introduce two new fields beside it named p2m_levels and p2m_root, which then caters for levels greater than 4 in a compatible manner. ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |