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] linux kernel 2.6.37

> From: Vasiliy G Tolstov [mailto:v.tolstov@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 10:35 AM
> To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> Cc: Don Brearley; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] linux kernel 2.6.37
> 
> On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 09:45 -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >  I think I know why this is happening = the
> > kernel allocates pagetables as if you have 4GB of memory and that
> eats much of low memory.
> > If you decrease the 'maxmem' you should see a smaller amount being
> used.
> >
> 
> And why xenlinux kernel from centos (2.6.18-194.26.1.el5xen) displays
> all memory as available:
> 
> cat /proc/meminfo under 2.6.37 (iommu=off acpi=off):
> MemTotal:         447220 kB
> 
> cat /proc/meminfo under 2.6.18-194.26.1.el5xen:
> MemTotal:       524288 kB
> 
> ?

FYI, I've seen a similar problem with 2.6.37 but noticed
it when manually ballooning a PV guest.  For example:

# echo $((256*1024)) > /sys/devices/system/xen_memory/xen_memory0/target_kb

should reduce memory to 256M (or at least somewhere close)
but instead /proc/meminfo shows 217812 kB, or about 15%
lower than expected.  This looks like approximately the
same percentage of memory loss that Vasiliy is reporting
on boot.

/me wonders if it might be related to this thread:

http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2010-09/msg00987.html 

assuming the related patch got upstream.  Jeremy cc'ed just in case.

I do NOT see this issue with 2.6.35.4.  In fact, I now see
a MemTotal boot-time difference when I boot both with mem=512
(in vm.cfg): 2.6.35.4 kernel shows 506864, 2.6.37 shows 495456.
Not as much as Vasiliy reports, but still a big mystery.

If this problem is real and widespread, I hope nobody is comparing
KVM vs Xen (or Xen vs native) on 2.6.37 as that much memory loss
could result in a significant performance loss for a Xen guest.

Dan

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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>