[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/NUMA: make init_node_heap() respect Xen heap limit
On Thu, 2015-08-27 at 02:37 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > On NUMA systems, where we try to use node local memory for the basic > control structures of the buddy allocator, this special case needs to > take into consideration a possible address width limit placed on the > Xen heap. In turn this (but also other, more abstract considerations) > requires that xenheap_max_mfn() not be called more than once (at most > we might permit it to be called a second time with a larger value than > was passed the first time), and be called only before calling > end_boot_allocator(). > > While inspecting all the involved code, a couple of off-by-one issues > were found (and are being corrected here at once): > - arch_init_memory() cleared one too many page table slots > - the highmem_start based invocation of xenheap_max_mfn() passed too > big a value > - xenheap_max_mfn() calculated the wrong bit count in edge cases > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> @@ -428,14 +434,18 @@ static unsigned long init_node_heap(int > } > #ifdef DIRECTMAP_VIRT_END > else if ( *use_tail && nr >= needed && > - (mfn + nr) <= (virt_to_mfn(eva - 1) + 1) ) > + (mfn + nr) <= (virt_to_mfn(eva - 1) + 1) && > + (!xenheap_bits || > + !((mfn + nr - 1) >> (xenheap_bits - PAGE_SHIFT))) ) This logic appears twice (with just s/nr/needed/ the second time), and it is a reasonably complex set of conditions. Moving it into a helper might be a nice cleanup, which would also allow a descriptive name to be used and also perhaps separating the various conditions into their own if (...) return which might aid readability. Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |