[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 16/16] libxl/arm: Add the size of ACPI tables to maxmem
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 11:43:38AM -0700, Shannon Zhao wrote: > > > On 2016/9/27 9:35, Wei Liu wrote: > >On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 09:01:00AM -0700, Shannon Zhao wrote: > >> > >> > >>On 2016/9/27 2:41, Wei Liu wrote: > >>>On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 02:54:55PM -0700, Shannon Zhao wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>On 2016/9/22 7:10, Wei Liu wrote: > >>>>>>diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_dom.c b/tools/libxl/libxl_dom.c > >>>>>>>index 2924629..118beab 100644 > >>>>>>>--- a/tools/libxl/libxl_dom.c > >>>>>>>+++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_dom.c > >>>>>>>@@ -408,8 +408,15 @@ int libxl__build_pre(libxl__gc *gc, uint32_t > >>>>>>>domid, > >>>>>>> } > >>>>>>> } > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>+ > >>>>>>>+ rc = libxl__arch_memory_constant(gc, info, state); > >>>>>>>+ if (rc < 0) { > >>>>>>>+ LOGE(ERROR, "Couldn't get arch constant memory size"); > >>>>>>>+ return ERROR_FAIL; > >>>>>>>+ } > >>>>>>>+ > >>>>>>> if (xc_domain_setmaxmem(ctx->xch, domid, info->target_memkb + > >>>>>>>- LIBXL_MAXMEM_CONSTANT) < 0) { > >>>>>>>+ LIBXL_MAXMEM_CONSTANT + rc) < 0) { > >>>>>I think this LIBXL_MAXMEM_CONSTANT should be pushed to your helper > >>>>>function, too. > >>>>> > >>>>>So that, we can have all LIBXL_MAXMEM_CONSTANT removed in libxl > >>>>>functions (see libxl.c and libxl_dom.c) > >>>>> > >>>>If we push LIBXL_MAXMEM_CONSTANT to the libxl_arch_memory_constant and > >>>>remove it from libxl.c, do we need to call libxl_arch_memory_constant > >>>>there > >>>>in libxl_set_memory_target()? > >>>> > >>> > >>>Yes, we need to call that function everywhere to get consistent results. > >>>That's the reason I asked you to consolidate it to a function. > >>> > >>Well it's a little awkward I think, since in libxl_domain_setmaxmem() and > >>libxl_set_memory_target() it seems it can't get the parameters info and > >>state for libxl__arch_memory_constant(). > >>I'm not sure how to solve it. Wei, any suggestion? > >> > > > >Hmm... > > > >The first question is can state be derived from build_info ? From my > >quick skim of the code the answer is likely yes. > > > I'm not familiar with the relationship between these structures and not sure > how to do this. Please give me some suggestion. > Oh, I was just reading the code in your patch series and existing code in libxl_arm.c. Here is my analysis of the code, please point out any inaccuracy. In your patch that estimates the size of ACPI table(s), xc_config is needed. In particular, you need to know the gic version -- in fact that's the only thing you need to know as far as I can tell. In libxl_arm.c, the gic version is finally saved to d_config, which means you should be able to later extract that from d_config. But, as I understand it, you can't use d_config only while *building* the domain, because the gic version might be determined only after the domain is constructed (_NATIVE case). If you want to do so, you need to move some code around, which might or might not be feasible -- I haven't checked. So based on my analysis, it would make sense to have such function: libxl__arch_extra_memory(gc, d_config) This is the function that is used in libxl_set_memory_target and friends. Obviously x86 would only need to return a constant in that function. Then, in arm implementation: libxl__get_acpi_size(gc, info, gic_version /* not build_state anymore */) /* also fix up libxl__estimate_madt_size */ /* this is the function called when constructing the domain etc, only * in libxl_arm.c */ static acpi_extra_memory(gc, build_info, gic_version) { libxl__get_acpi_size... } libxl__arch_extra_memory(gc, d_config) { gic_version = d_config->..gic_version; acpi_extra_memory... } Does this make sense? One thing I don't quite understand is that in patch 4 libxl__estimate_acpi_size seems to do allocations as well. You might want to rename that libxl__allocate_acpi_tables or something. Wei. > >Then, you can call libxl_retrieve_domain_configuration to get > >domain_config, then domain_config->build_info, so that you can derive > >state from it. > > > >Feel free to ask more questions. > > > >Without such arrangement, ballooning is going to be broken for ARM > >guests. > > > I see. > > Thanks, > -- > Shannon _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |