On 17.05.2023 17:56, Oleksii wrote: > On Tue, 2023-05-16 at 17:42 +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 11.05.2023 19:09, Oleksii Kurochko wrote: >>> =================================================================== >>> ========= >>> + * Start addr | End addr | Size | Slot >>> |area description >>> + * >>> =================================================================== >>> ========= >>> + * FFFFFFFFC0800000 | FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF |1016 MB | L2 511 | >>> Unused >>> + * FFFFFFFFC0600000 | FFFFFFFFC0800000 | 2 MB | L2 511 | >>> Fixmap >>> + * FFFFFFFFC0200000 | FFFFFFFFC0600000 | 4 MB | L2 511 | >>> FDT >>> + * FFFFFFFFC0000000 | FFFFFFFFC0200000 | 2 MB | L2 511 | >>> Xen >>> + * ... | 1 GB | L2 510 | >>> Unused >>> + * 0000003200000000 | 0000007f40000000 | 309 GB | L2 200-509 | >>> Direct map >> >> The upper bound here is 0000007f80000000 afaict, > It should be 0000007f80000000. 0000007f40000000 is start address of 509 > slot. > >> which then also makes >> the earlier gap 1Gb in size. > do you mean that it is better to write start and end address ( > 0000007f80000000 - 7FC0000000 ) of L2 510 slot explicitly?
No, not really. The ... there is quite okay imo, because of the differing upper bits. I was merely pointing out that as you had it the gap was 2Gb (from 0000007f40000000 till FFFFFFFFC0000000, leaving aside the ignored upper bits). Jan
