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/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] Re: non-contiguous allocations

To: Olaf Hering <olaf@xxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: non-contiguous allocations
From: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 19:46:54 +0100
Delivery-date: Fri, 06 May 2011 11:47:50 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:user-agent:date:subject:from:to:message-id :thread-topic:thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=4b8kpW+R2cuDc4hORcXOKhs7EFnfBnEOr6RaomvocCM=; b=YlZsg9WTwvrUP7KHtWFlWgZio4tMWLGS4rDUGtl1ExFrKtQSCAW1nVnJpRqfIKAUFk ydduZn90/788k1AfjKeRtFV17CkJ+VR/4a3jhRQUfnkdHH+kfQbY847Hq9ONGBj9W4i6 92glDL2NMgJmEpo3yrLnlk739qr3uNAWMxg0g=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=user-agent:date:subject:from:to:message-id:thread-topic :thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=VzaMOl/CUm7Vp1SfmWlOGJpkffxQLlre7KOw2iOgmqRZE1bzTzGW3zTOHfNn2k9ncg QWch0o0gcqqUH/Fp+BCuTxuXJJBp7dS3rXmNkGzWRRRy/85z4qJp2TRIPsklJrKp3jwD hqdb3Y4sDUPMl0/LjTeCVBTCzBTQrK+0frEt8=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20110506181234.GA24767@xxxxxxxxx>
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>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcwMHffthjabuGRTjkKjzjvQIik9NQ==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] Re: non-contiguous allocations
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/
On 06/05/2011 19:12, "Olaf Hering" <olaf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 18, Olaf Hering wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 01, George Dunlap wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 19:04 +0100, Olaf Hering wrote:
>>>> Using the u16 means each cpu could in theory use up to 256MB as trace
>>>> buffer. However such a large allocation will currently fail on x86 due
>>>> to the MAX_ORDER limit.
>>> FWIW, I don't believe that there's any reason the allocations have to be
>>> contiguous any more.  I kept them contiguous to minimize the changes to
>>> the moving parts near a release.  But the new system has been pretty
>>> well tested now, so I think looking at non-contiguous allocations may be
>>> worthwhile.
> Is there a way to allocate more than 128mb with repeated calls to
> alloc_xenheap_page()?

Yes it should just work. Are you sure you actually have more than 128MB
available (not all allocated to dom0 for example)?

>  From which pool should the per-cpu tracebuffers
> get allocated?  alloc_domheap_page() wants a domain, so I think thats
> the wrong interface.

Yes, sticking with alloc_xenheap_pages() is good.

 -- Keir

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

Xen-devel mailing list