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] hypervisor memory usage

To: Vladimir Zidar <mr_w@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] hypervisor memory usage
From: Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:58:00 +0200
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 04:59:01 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4AE828A4.4080601@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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <C70DD036.18A90%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4AE828A4.4080601@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:19:01PM +0100, Vladimir Zidar wrote:
> I have actually tracked this down to xen version which centos (could be 
> also what rhel uses):
> 

CentOS is (or, aims to be) 1:1 clone of RHEL.

> Version xen.gz-2.6.18-53.1.4.el5.centos.plus gives
> BIOS-provided physical RAM map:
> Xen: 0000000000000000 - 00000001f00cb000 (usable)
> On node 0 totalpages: 2031819
>  DMA zone: 2031819 pages, LIFO batch:31
> 
> and xen.gz-2.6.18-164.el5 gives:
> 
> BIOS-provided physical RAM map:
> Xen: 0000000000000000 - 00000001dc9c8000 (usable)
> On node 0 totalpages: 1952200
>  DMA zone: 1952200 pages, LIFO batch:31
> 
> That is 79619 pages difference - slightly over 300MB.
> 

Well.. that explains it..

> 
> Now I understand that this could be due to rhel patches, and maybe 
> doesn't relate to official xen builds, but I'd like to know if this 
> issue was known or not before jumping into xen 3.4 - as it won't be 
> direct rpm/yum upgrade path.
> 

RHEL 5.4 (-164 kernel) added more support for VT-d etc, so maybe that's why
more DMA memory is reserved. dunno.

-- Pasi


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