[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [v7][PATCH 07/16] hvmloader/e820: construct guest e820 table
On 2015/7/14 17:32, Jan Beulich wrote: On 14.07.15 at 07:22, <tiejun.chen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: + for ( i = 0; i < memory_map.nr_map; i++ ) + { + uint64_t end = e820[i].addr + e820[i].size;Either loop index/boundary or used array are wrong here: In the earlier loop you copied memory_map[0...nr_map-1] to e820[n...n+nr_map-1], but here you're looping looking at e820[0...nr_map-1]You're right. I should lookup all e820[] like this, for ( i = 0; i < nr; i++ )Hmm, I would have thought you only care about either part of the just glued together map.+ if ( e820[i].type == E820_RAM && + low_mem_end > e820[i].addr && low_mem_end < end )Assuming you mean to look at the RDM e820[] entries here, this is not a correct check: You don't care about partly or fully contained, all you care about is whether low_mem_end extends beyond the start of the region.Here I'm looking at the e820 entry indicating low memory. Because low_mem_end = hvm_info->low_mem_pgend << PAGE_SHIFT; and when we allocate MMIO in pci.c, its possible to populate RAM so hvm_info->low_mem_pgend would be changed over there. So we need to compensate this loss with high memory. Here memory_map[] also records the original low/high memory, so if low_mem_end is less-than the original we need this compensation.And I'm not disputing your intentions - I'm merely pointing out that afaics the code above doesn't match these intentions. In particular (as said) I don't see why you need to check low_mem_end < end. Before we probably relocate RAM, low_mem_end = hvm_info->low_mem_pgend << PAGE_SHIFT and the e820 entry specific to low memory, [e820[X].addr, end] Here, end = e820[X].addr + e820[X].size; Now low_mem_end = end. After that, low_mem_end < end. so if(low_mem_end > e820[X].addr && low_mem_end < end) is true, this means that associated RAM entry is hitting, right? Then we need to revise this entry as [e820[X].addr, low_mem_end], and compensate [end - low_mem_end] to high memory. Anything I'm still wrong here? Thanks Tiejun _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |