[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5303AA97.3010202@citrix.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 18:46:47 +0000
From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>
CC: Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@...rix.com>,
<xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>, <jonathan.davies@...rix.com>,
<wei.liu2@...rix.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH net-next v5 2/9] xen-netback: Change TX path
from grant copy to mapping
On 18/02/14 17:40, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-01-20 at 21:24 +0000, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
>>
>> @@ -344,8 +346,26 @@ struct xenvif *xenvif_alloc(struct device *parent, domid_t domid,
>> vif->pending_prod = MAX_PENDING_REQS;
>> for (i = 0; i < MAX_PENDING_REQS; i++)
>> vif->pending_ring[i] = i;
>> - for (i = 0; i < MAX_PENDING_REQS; i++)
>> - vif->mmap_pages[i] = NULL;
>> + spin_lock_init(&vif->dealloc_lock);
>> + spin_lock_init(&vif->response_lock);
>> + /* If ballooning is disabled, this will consume real memory, so you
>> + * better enable it.
>
> Almost no one who would be affected by this is going to read this
> comment. And it doesn't just require enabling ballooning, but actually
> booting with some maxmem "slack" to leave space.
>
> Classic-xen kernels used to add 8M of slop to the physical address space
> to leave a suitable pool for exactly this sort of thing. I never liked
> that but perhaps it should be reconsidered (or at least raised as a
> possibility with the core-Xen Linux guys).
I plan to fix the balloon memory hotplug stuff to do the right thing
(it's almost there -- it just tries to overlap the new memory with
existing stuff).
David
--
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