On 05/19/2015 01:14 PM, Wei Liu wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 01:03:59PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
On 05/19/2015 12:31 PM, Wei Liu wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 12:23:07PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
On 05/18/2015 11:34 AM, Wei Liu wrote:
Make the setup process similar to PV counterpart. That is, to allocate a
P2M array that covers the whole memory range and start from there. This
is clearer than using an array with no holes in it.
Also the dummy layout should take MMIO hole into consideration. We might
end up having two vmemranges in the dummy layout.
Signed-off-by: Wei Liu <wei.l...@citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Campbell <ian.campb...@citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jack...@eu.citrix.com>
---
tools/libxc/xc_hvm_build_x86.c | 66 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/libxc/xc_hvm_build_x86.c b/tools/libxc/xc_hvm_build_x86.c
index df4b7ed..77678f1 100644
--- a/tools/libxc/xc_hvm_build_x86.c
+++ b/tools/libxc/xc_hvm_build_x86.c
@@ -238,6 +238,7 @@ static int setup_guest(xc_interface *xch,
{
xen_pfn_t *page_array = NULL;
unsigned long i, vmemid, nr_pages = args->mem_size >> PAGE_SHIFT;
+ unsigned long p2m_size;
unsigned long target_pages = args->mem_target >> PAGE_SHIFT;
unsigned long entry_eip, cur_pages, cur_pfn;
void *hvm_info_page;
@@ -254,8 +255,8 @@ static int setup_guest(xc_interface *xch,
xen_pfn_t special_array[NR_SPECIAL_PAGES];
xen_pfn_t ioreq_server_array[NR_IOREQ_SERVER_PAGES];
uint64_t total_pages;
- xen_vmemrange_t dummy_vmemrange;
- unsigned int dummy_vnode_to_pnode;
+ xen_vmemrange_t dummy_vmemrange[2];
+ unsigned int dummy_vnode_to_pnode[2];
memset(&elf, 0, sizeof(elf));
if ( elf_init(&elf, image, image_size) != 0 )
@@ -275,17 +276,37 @@ static int setup_guest(xc_interface *xch,
if ( args->nr_vmemranges == 0 )
{
- /* Build dummy vnode information */
- dummy_vmemrange.start = 0;
- dummy_vmemrange.end = args->mem_size;
- dummy_vmemrange.flags = 0;
- dummy_vmemrange.nid = 0;
- args->nr_vmemranges = 1;
- args->vmemranges = &dummy_vmemrange;
+ /* Build dummy vnode information
+ *
+ * Guest physical address space layout:
+ * [0, hole_start) [hole_start, 4G) [4G, highmem_end)
+ *
+ * Of course if there is no high memory, the second vmemrange
+ * has no effect on the actual result.
+ */
- dummy_vnode_to_pnode = XC_NUMA_NO_NODE;
+ dummy_vmemrange[0].start = 0;
+ dummy_vmemrange[0].end = args->lowmem_end;
+ dummy_vmemrange[0].flags = 0;
+ dummy_vmemrange[0].nid = 0;
+ dummy_vnode_to_pnode[0] = XC_NUMA_NO_NODE;
+ args->nr_vmemranges = 1;
args->nr_vnodes = 1;
- args->vnode_to_pnode = &dummy_vnode_to_pnode;
+
+ if ( args->highmem_end > (1ULL << 32) )
+ {
+ dummy_vmemrange[1].start = 1ULL << 32;
+ dummy_vmemrange[1].end = args->highmem_end;
+ dummy_vmemrange[1].flags = 0;
+ dummy_vmemrange[1].nid = 0;
+ dummy_vnode_to_pnode[1] = XC_NUMA_NO_NODE;
+
+ args->nr_vmemranges++;
+ args->nr_vnodes++;
(+Dario)
Does having high memory mean that we need to have 2 vnodes? We should be
Yes, see the comment above.
able to cope with multiple vmemranges per node, right?
Yes. That's already done in libxl's function to build hvm vmemranges.
This is only a simple dummy layout so nothing fancy happens here.
Right. But having multiple vnodes for a dummy topology looks to me a little
counter-intuitive: people often assume that when number of nodes is 1 we
don't have any NUMA-ness. Here we may need to look at vnode_to_pnode
(possibly at both of the elements) to realize that this is a dummy layout.
And given that this layout can be expressed with nr_vnodes=1 &&
nr_vmemranges=2 I am not sure what we gain by having two vnodes.
Ah, so that's a bug: args->nr_vnodes++ should be deleted.
And dummy_vnode_to_pnode[2] should become a scalar.
-boris
We still only have one vnode (nid = 0). That vnode contains two
vmemranges.
Wei.
-boris
Wei.
-boris
+ }
+
+ args->vmemranges = dummy_vmemrange;
+ args->vnode_to_pnode = dummy_vnode_to_pnode;
}
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
