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] Re: Xenheap disappearance: (was: xen_phys_start for32b)

To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Re: Xenheap disappearance: (was: xen_phys_start for32b)
From: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 15:16:06 -0800 (PST)
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 15:16:59 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <49704F4D.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx>
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
 -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 1:12 AM
> >>> Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 15.01.09 19:51 >>>
> >I think the patch you attached will work just fine for you 
> for now. If your
> >stuff goes in before getting rid of xenheap restrictions on 
> x86/64, then I
> >would take this patch at that time. But I think that's 
> unlikely. Well, I
> >hope it is, unless I stall on my xenheap patch again. :-)
> 
> I'd hope that too, because the patch as is must not go in, as 
> it would break
> other assumptions afaics: At present, the tools balloon out 
> of Dom0 exactly
> the amount needed for creating pv domains (I think there's 
> some slack for
> hvm ones), so the fact that the domain heap now serves 
> xmalloc requires
> that there always be some extra space available in Xen (also to serve
> dynamic allocations). Additionally I think the minimum even a 
> temporary
> patch like this should do is fall back to allocating from the 
> Xen heap when
> the domain heap is unable the supply the requested amount.

Jan --

I'm not sure what you are getting at.  Are you saying that
creating a domain takes (big)MB from domheap, then later
(little)KB from xenheap, and if we combine domheap and xenheap,
the tools might launch a domain when available memory is
greater than (big)MB but smaller than (big)MB+(small)KB,
and that will result in the tools thinking the domain
can launch but it won't?  I suppose that's possible,
but exceedingly unlikely.  And I think Keir's plan will
have the same problem.  Sounds like a tools bug, not a
reason to avoid modernizing Xen memory management.

Dan

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