| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
RE: [Xen-devel] Xen-unstable panic: FATAL PAGE FAULT
Yes, you are right. I have it printted out, it is 18.
Thanks for correcting me.
I am interested in your assumption on list NULL check on last mail.
How can I set up a test to verify it?
> Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 09:05:50 +0100
> From: JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx
> To: tinnycloud@xxxxxxxxxxx
> CC: keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Xen-unstable panic: FATAL PAGE FAULT
>
> >>> On 01.09.10 at 09:17, MaoXiaoyun <tinnycloud@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > As I go through the chunk merge code in free_heap_pages, one thing I'd like
> >
> > to mention is, previously, I printted out all domain pages when allocated,
> >
> > and I found the order in assgin_pages in
> > /xen-4.0.0/xen/common/page_alloc.c:1087,
> >
> > the order either be 0, or 9, and later I know that is because domain U
> > populate physmap
> >
> > 2M Bytes everytime.
> >
> >
> >
> > And here in the while s
tatement, the order is compare with MAX_ORDER, which
> > is 20.
>
> Are you sure it's 20? MAX_ORDER should be 18 for x86 afaict.
>
> Jan
>
|
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home