WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] x86 swiotlb questions

To: <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,"Keir Fraser" <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] x86 swiotlb questions
From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 14:17:16 +0000
Delivery-date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 06:16:09 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C1A85BC6.6247%keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <4582B6CF.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx> <C1A85BC6.6247%keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 15.12.06 15:03 >>>
>On 15/12/06 13:53, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> I already have patches ready to do this (the DMA thing really is a nice side
>> effect, I mostly wanted it for 32on64, so that I can restrict domain
>> allocations for 32-bit domains). Are you saying I should throw away the
>> DMA specialization then altogether (I already have no special DMA heap
>> anymore)? The leftovers from it are so that one can reserve some portion
>> of low memory to be returned only when the width restriction is low enough
>> (i.e. to retain dma_emergency_pool functionality), which certainly isn't
>> really appropriate anymore now (it should rather be a percentage or
>> something like that, so that the lower you get the more of the memory
>> remains reserved for specialized allocations).
>
>I think dma_emergency_pool as is can go. Possibly it should be replaced by
>allocator-management tools in dom0 to allow setting of limits on a
>per-bitwidth basis.

Okay, but I think I'll leave this as a separate change (that we probably first
should reach agreement on what it really ought to do and not do).

>Is this one of the patches you already sent in your 32-on-64 batch, or an
>additional one?

An additional one (or actually, a set of them, to make the individual steps
more clear). As a followup, I'm also planning to get rid of the Xen heaps
on those arches where they aren't needed (x86-64, not sure about ppc
and ia64, but I would assume it's really only x86-32 that needs it).

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel