Izik Eidus wrote:
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>> Izik Eidus wrote:
>>>> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I think it's just a matter of calling do_mmap() with the
>>>>> appropriate parameters. It looks likes there's some drivers call
>>>>> do_mmap() directly.
>>>>>
>>>> yea, i think you right, this is excellent idea!, when we will merge
>>>> the swapping to kvm, we will add swapping support to older userspace.
>>>
>>> Here's a patch against your series. The memset in kvmctl ends up
>>> making the guest use all physical memory to start off with but I did
>>> confirm that once the system is under memory pressure, the guest's
>>> memory becomes swappable. Of course, it's quite painful :-)
>>>
>>> A nice thing though is that a lot of the code becomes a bit cleaner
>>> and we can eliminate the phys_mem array entirely.
>>
>>> /* Allocate if a slot is being created */
>>> - if (npages && !new.phys_mem) {
>>> - new.phys_mem = vmalloc(npages * sizeof(struct page *));
>>> -
>>> - if (!new.phys_mem)
>>> - goto out_unlock;
>>> -
>>> + if (npages) {
>>
>> This is wrong apparently. We needed to have new.phys_mem to indicate
>> whether the slot has been created yet or not. The new attached patch
>> uses new.rmap instead of new.phys_mem to accomplish the same goal.
>>
> this patch look good, and indeed make all the things simple.
> but why you didnt use new.phys_mem ?
>> I no longer see the BUG() that I was seeing.
>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Anthony Liguori
>>>
>>>
>>
upsss
ignore me:)
i am idiot: :)
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
