On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 04:48:09AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 20.02.19 at 18:08, <wei.l...@citrix.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 01:09:56PM +0000, Wei Liu wrote: > > [...] > >> I think under-allocate-then-map looks plausible. xmalloc will need > >> to allocate pages, put them into an array and call __vmap on that array > >> directly. > > > > The biggest issue with this approach is that we now need an array of > > 1UL<<MAX_ORDER to accommodate mfns. Back of envelope calculation: on x86 > > this is going to be (1UL<<20)*8 bytes long. This is not feasible. > > Are we really calling xmalloc() with any number nearly this big?
In practice, I don't think so. What do you think is a sensible limit? Wei. > > Jan > > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
