[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090507144904.GA2344@elte.hu>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 16:49:04 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, mingo@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: 46 bit PAE support
* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > Yes, struct page is ~64 bytes, and 64*64 == 4096.
> >
> > Alas, it's not a problem: my suggestion wasnt to simulate 64 TB of
> > RAM. My suggestion was to create a sparse physical memory map (in a
> > virtual machine) that spreads ~1GB of RAM all around the 64 TB
> > physical address space. That will test whether the kernel is able to
> > map and work with such physical addresses. (which will cover most of
> > the issues)
> >
> > A good look at /debug/x86/dump_pagetables with such a system booted
> > up would be nice as well - to make sure every virtual memory range
> > is in its proper area, and that there's enough free space around
> > them.
> >
>
> We're working on simulating this at Intel. We should hopefully be
> able to test this next week.
Wow, very nice!
It would be nice to do it on a KVM basis and submit the
weird-memory-layout submission to the KVM tree. It would be helpful
with the reproduction of weird, memory layout dependent bugs too for
example. Plus we could create a test facility that randomizes the
physical memory layout (with a given fragmentation level).
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists