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] Different: nr_pages vs. max_pfn

To: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Y. D." <duyuyang@xxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Different: nr_pages vs. max_pfn
From: "Jayaraman, Bhaskar" <Bhaskar.Jayaraman@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 15:53:54 +0530
Accept-language: en-US
Acceptlanguage: en-US
Cc:
Delivery-date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 02:24:33 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C54992D3.1F600%keir.fraser@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: <200811191745479618049@xxxxxxxxx> <C54992D3.1F600%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AclKLM8UDVgd9LYgEd2n/QAWy6hiGQAA9usw
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] Different: nr_pages vs. max_pfn
Keir, does Dom0 Linux do this for each Mini-OS instance that is spawned? If so 
then shouldn't the memory usage value in xm list for each PV guest take into 
account this additional usage of memory? i.e. 32MB + 8MB?

Bhaskar.

-----Original Message-----
From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Keir Fraser
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 3:24 PM
To: Y. D.; xen-devel
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Different: nr_pages vs. max_pfn

The shared_info value is set up by the guest itself during boot. It's larger
because Linux adds extra space at the end of its p2m map for backend
drivers.

 -- Keir

On 19/11/08 09:45, "Y. D." <duyuyang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> In start_info, there is a field nr_pages definig how much memory is allocated
> to the domain, which is obvious.
> While in shared_info, there is a field max_pfn. I don't know why max_pfn is
> not equal to nr_pages.
> Say for 32MB memory, nr_pages = 8192, while max_pfn = 10240 (may vary?), of
> which 2048 pfn's have invalid mfn.
> Can anybody explain that why max_pfn is larger? Is it static or dynamic?
> Furture, does pfn to mfn frame mapping ever change? Hopefully not.
>
> Thanks,
> Shawn
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel



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

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

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