On Fri, 2015-09-04 at 13:50 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 04/09/15 13:02, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > On 04.09.15 at 13:29, wrote:
> > > Anyway, I tried your suggestion to dropped the call to
> > > xenheap_max_mfn when
> > > Xen
> > > setups the xenheap for arm64 and it allows me to boot corr
On 04/09/15 13:52, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> commit b11ab8e4982228d7944e11010f5b8eec890caf30
>> Author: Julien Grall
>> Date: Thu Sep 3 21:49:31 2015 +0100
>>
>> xen: pagealloc: Correctly calculate the number of xenheap bits
>
> More accurate would be
>
> xen: arm64: do not (incorrectly)
> commit b11ab8e4982228d7944e11010f5b8eec890caf30
> Author: Julien Grall
> Date: Thu Sep 3 21:49:31 2015 +0100
>
> xen: pagealloc: Correctly calculate the number of xenheap bits
More accurate would be
xen: arm64: do not (incorrectly) limit size of xenheap
Or some such?
With that:
On 04/09/15 13:02, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.09.15 at 13:29, wrote:
>> Anyway, I tried your suggestion to dropped the call to xenheap_max_mfn when
>> Xen
>> setups the xenheap for arm64 and it allows me to boot correctly Xen on
>> X-gene.
>> See patch below, I can send the patch in a separat
On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 06:02:28AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 04.09.15 at 13:29, wrote:
> > Anyway, I tried your suggestion to dropped the call to xenheap_max_mfn when
> > Xen
> > setups the xenheap for arm64 and it allows me to boot correctly Xen on
> > X-gene.
> > See patch below, I ca
>>> On 04.09.15 at 13:29, wrote:
> Anyway, I tried your suggestion to dropped the call to xenheap_max_mfn when
> Xen
> setups the xenheap for arm64 and it allows me to boot correctly Xen on
> X-gene.
> See patch below, I can send the patch in a separate thread if necessary.
That would depend on
Hi Jan,
On 04/09/15 10:09, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> "create_xen_entries: L2 failed" tells me, through code inspection rather
>> than usefulness of the logging, that alloc_xenheap_page has returned NULL.
>>
>> I think this is simply because all RAM on Mustang is at physical address
>> 128GB onwards or
>>> On 04.09.15 at 10:52, wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-09-04 at 02:39 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >
>> > > > On 04.09.15 at 10:27, wrote:
>> > On Fri, 2015-09-04 at 01:37 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> > > > > > On 03.09.15 at 22:58, wrote:
>> > > > And found why! The last xenheap_bits changed from 39
On Fri, 2015-09-04 at 02:39 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > > > On 04.09.15 at 10:27, wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-09-04 at 01:37 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > > On 03.09.15 at 22:58, wrote:
> > > > And found why! The last xenheap_bits changed from 39 to 38.
> > > >
> > > > On x-gene the las
>>> On 04.09.15 at 10:27, wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-09-04 at 01:37 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> > > > On 03.09.15 at 22:58, wrote:
>> > And found why! The last xenheap_bits changed from 39 to 38.
>> >
>> > On x-gene the last max mfn used for the xenheap is 0x440, which the
>> > new computation,
On Fri, 2015-09-04 at 01:37 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > > > On 03.09.15 at 22:58, wrote:
> > On 03/09/2015 21:01, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > On 27/08/2015 09:37, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On NUMA systems, where we try to use node local memory for the
> > > > basic
> > > > control structure
>>> On 03.09.15 at 22:58, wrote:
> On 03/09/2015 21:01, Julien Grall wrote:
>> On 27/08/2015 09:37, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On NUMA systems, where we try to use node local memory for the basic
>>> control structures of the buddy allocator, this special case needs to
>>> take into consideration a po
On 03/09/2015 21:01, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> On 27/08/2015 09:37, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On NUMA systems, where we try to use node local memory for the basic
>> control structures of the buddy allocator, this special case needs to
>> take into consideration a possible address width limit
Hi Jan,
On 27/08/2015 09:37, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On NUMA systems, where we try to use node local memory for the basic
> control structures of the buddy allocator, this special case needs to
> take into consideration a possible address width limit placed on the
> Xen heap. In turn this (but also o
On Thu, 2015-08-27 at 02:37 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On NUMA systems, where we try to use node local memory for the basic
> control structures of the buddy allocator, this special case needs to
> take into consideration a possible address width limit placed on the
> Xen heap. In turn this (but a
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 02:37:17AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On NUMA systems, where we try to use node local memory for the basic
> control structures of the buddy allocator, this special case needs to
> take into consideration a possible address width limit placed on the
> Xen heap. In turn this
On 27/08/15 09:37, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On NUMA systems, where we try to use node local memory for the basic
> control structures of the buddy allocator, this special case needs to
> take into consideration a possible address width limit placed on the
> Xen heap. In turn this (but also other, more
CC George (x86 MM maintainer)
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 02:37:17AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On NUMA systems, where we try to use node local memory for the basic
> control structures of the buddy allocator, this special case needs to
> take into consideration a possible address width limit placed
18 matches
Mail list logo
