[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: E820 memory allocation issue on Threadripper platforms
- To: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2024 14:50:38 +0100
- Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL
- Cc: Patrick Plenefisch <simonpatp@xxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Fri, 19 Jan 2024 13:50:51 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 19.01.2024 14:40, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 01:23:56AM -0500, Patrick Plenefisch wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 3:46 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On 17.01.2024 07:12, Patrick Plenefisch wrote:
>>>> As someone who hasn't built a kernel in over a decade, should I figure
>>> out
>>>> how to do a kernel build with CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START=0x2000000 and report
>>>> back?
>>>
>>> That was largely a suggestion to perhaps allow you to gain some
>>> workable setup. It would be of interest to us largely for completeness.
>>>
>>
>> Typo aside, setting the boot to 2MiB works! It works better for PV
>
> Are there any downsides of running kernel with
> CONFIG_PHYSICAL_START=0x200000? I can confirm it fixes the issue on
> another affected system, and if there aren't any practical downsides,
> I'm tempted to change it the default kernel in Qubes OS.
There must have been a reason to make the default 16Mb. You may want
to fish out the commit doing so ... In Qubes, though, I understand
you're always running with Xen underneath, so unless this same kernel
is also needed to run in HVM guests, some of whatever the reasons may
have been may go away.
Jan
|
