similar to: dom0's layout on physical memory?

Hi, V6: The only change from V5 is in patch #6: - changed comment to reflect autoxlate - removed a redundant ASSERT - reworked logic a bit so that get_page_from_gfn() is called with NULL for p2m type as before. arm has ASSERT wanting it to be NULL. Tim: patch 4 needs your approval. Daniel: patch 5 needs your approval. These patches implement PVH dom0. Patches 1 and 2

Hi, Maybe it''s a dumb question, but I''m actually trying to understand how the memory allocation works within Xen. I try to give 128MB to a domU and see if it increases for example when I "nano" a 500mb file, but the process just get killed when it reachs the 128MB memory limit. How do I configure the guests so they can ask for more memory until a limit is reached

I am using Xen 3.0.4 vmx (on Intel VT). I need to map in a foreign page, given its mfn (not gpfn), into dom0. I used to do this quite well with Xen 3.0.2. However, when I ported my code to Xen 3.0.4, things seem to have changed. Does xc_map_foreign_range accept an mfn or a gpfn as its argument? It seems to be accepting gpfn in 3.0.4. Is that true? If so, can anyone please suggest a way for

hi I try to understand the code of xen memory there are gmfn, gpfn and pfn in the xen and in the /xen/include/xen/mm.h there are some explanation about them as follows: * 1. gpfn/gpaddr: A guest-specific pseudo-physical frame number or address. * 2. gmfn/gmaddr: A machine address from the p.o.v. of a particular guest. * 3. mfn/maddr: A real machine frame number or address. * 4.

With the lake of iommu, dom0 must have a 1:1 memory mapping for all these guest physical address. When the ballon decides to give back a page to the kernel, this page must have the same address as previously. Otherwise, we will loose the 1:1 mapping and will break DMA-capable device. Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org> CC: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org> CC: Jan Beulich

I have a 12GB 64-bit Linux HVM guest (CentOS 5.5). When I look at the e820 map in the guest, I see the following: BIOS-provided physical RAM map: BIOS-e820: 0000000000010000 - 000000000009e000 (usable) BIOS-e820: 000000000009e000 - 00000000000a0000 (reserved) BIOS-e820: 00000000000e0000 - 0000000000100000 (reserved) BIOS-e820: 0000000000100000 - 00000000f0000000 (usable) BIOS-e820:

We use XENMEM_add_to_physmap_range which is the preferred interface for foreign mappings. Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com> --- arch/arm/include/asm/xen/interface.h | 1 + arch/arm/xen/enlighten.c | 100 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- arch/x86/include/asm/xen/interface.h | 1 + include/xen/interface/memory.h | 18 ++++++ 4 files changed,

Hi all, I am trying to find out why the minimum memory allocation for a domu is 4MB. I am running MiniOS and a small application that requires no more than 8 KB or RAM. Can anyone give me a comprehensive answer to this question, i am really looking to get to grips with this in detail. Is this an arbitrary decision, or is there something more meaningful at work here? Thanks Paul

This series implements ballooning for Xen on ARM and builds and Mukesh''s PVH privcmd stuff to implement foreign page mapping on ARM, replacing the old "HACK: initial (very hacky) XENMAPSPACE_gmfn_foreign" patch. The baseline is a bit complex, it is basically Stefano''s xenarm-forlinus branch (commit bbd6eb29214e) merged with Konrad''s linux-next-pvh branch

Checking that multi-page allocations are permitted is unnecessary for PoD population operations. Instead, the (loop invariant) check added for addressing XSA-31 can be moved here. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> --- a/xen/common/memory.c +++ b/xen/common/memory.c @@ -99,7 +99,8 @@ static void populate_physmap(struct memo

A number of build problems crept in once again. Fix them. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> --- a/xen/common/memory.c +++ b/xen/common/memory.c @@ -683,7 +683,7 @@ long do_memory_op(unsigned long cmd, XEN mfn = get_gfn_untyped(d, xrfp.gpfn); if ( mfn_valid(mfn) ) - guest_physmap_remove_page(d, xrfp.gpfn, mfn, PAGE_ORDER_4K); +

Hi Jeremy. Here are the 3 patches for ia64/xen support. The first one is just to move manage.c under drivers/xen. This is trivial. The second and third ones are for compilation fix on ia64. You may want to postpone those 2 patches to make your merge task easy as you said before. thanks, Diffstat arch/x86/xen/Makefile | 2 +- drivers/xen/Makefile | 2 +-

Hi Jeremy. Here are the 3 patches for ia64/xen support. The first one is just to move manage.c under drivers/xen. This is trivial. The second and third ones are for compilation fix on ia64. You may want to postpone those 2 patches to make your merge task easy as you said before. thanks, Diffstat arch/x86/xen/Makefile | 2 +- drivers/xen/Makefile | 2 +-

Hello, I''m new to Xen and especially to the hypervisor code. I''m working off a 3.0.4.1 base and have the following questions regarding the memory management code for an x86, 32-bit platform (capable of supporting PAE). I''m doing some research into providing grant table hypercall support from a Windows 2003 HVM. I have made all the necessary changes to allow the

On Wed, 2016-02-03 at 15:28 -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > > And I wonder if the XEN_DOMCTL_irq_permission aka, > > > xc_domain_irq_permission > > > had been called. I remember that at some point we missed it for > > > Xend.. > > > > > False alarm. > > It was all in Linux. Attached are four patches (the first two > are for

2011/7/19 Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>: > CC''ing Tim and xen-devel > > On Mon, 18 Jul 2011, Jiageng Yu wrote: >> 2011/7/16 Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>: >> > On Fri, 15 Jul 2011, Jiageng Yu wrote: >> >> 2011/7/15 Jiageng Yu <yujiageng734@gmail.com>: >> >> > 2011/7/15

Hello Jeson, On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 04:50:36PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > Just to make sure I understand here. For boosting through huge TLB, do > you mean we can do that in the future (e.g by mapping more userspace > pages to kenrel) or it can be done by this series (only about three 4K > pages were vmapped per virtqueue)? When I answered about the advantages of mmu notifier and

Hello Jeson, On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 04:50:36PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > Just to make sure I understand here. For boosting through huge TLB, do > you mean we can do that in the future (e.g by mapping more userspace > pages to kenrel) or it can be done by this series (only about three 4K > pages were vmapped per virtqueue)? When I answered about the advantages of mmu notifier and

By default, the function add_to_physmap_one set mfn to 0. Some code paths that result to an error, continue and the map the mfn 0 (valid on ARM) to the slot given by the guest. To fix the problem, return directly an error if sanity check has failed. Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org> --- xen/arch/arm/mm.c | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git

hi, How can I get corresponding shadowed page number of a virtual address in vm? -- Best Regards, Mohamad Rezaei