[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [PATCH for-4.17 1/2] docs: Document the minimal requirement of static heap
- To: Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Henry Wang <Henry.Wang@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 08:04:53 +0000
- Accept-language: zh-CN, en-US
- Arc-authentication-results: i=2; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass (sender ip is 63.35.35.123) smtp.rcpttodomain=lists.xenproject.org smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dmarc=pass (p=none sp=none pct=100) action=none header.from=arm.com; dkim=pass (signature was verified) header.d=armh.onmicrosoft.com; arc=pass (0 oda=1 ltdi=1 spf=[1,1,smtp.mailfrom=arm.com] dkim=[1,1,header.d=arm.com] dmarc=[1,1,header.from=arm.com])
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=arm.com; dkim=pass header.d=arm.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=QUQTYAAYg6BMKxnHHqfWjbSgA50vz4v+e8fI+kvGXmo=; b=JnWBjaFknS8DEMcK0RCWXxWSjYbZVTtWKCKuVF4iHCtcsSW5DBhZ+t/Ia9s42pMhXLaYeynaw4YiOdNjaLk//6XF1APuUJ2E9yhmLobg5J8FFXP27sBxT15WDcu8Yj1GoN+vrBzdEZyQxkylJFOMO/ORZVGM8KfU8lBOceR+CU+32cdGpiLeMzAbR53DJiUoNDEuxbTZ23wYmlk9UwZrI9u6ci1kmrTXbAjiqkQ2Nuo8AbTPGp9xwObUUQPqXp6lnMTXfYaXgGOLyXdX6dcO1Ib2Y6I9X6udzEls19yhxLH2zQEEoQQZUIW3AFUZAs/b7JdBLkg+tYpeSqNESbwyfg==
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=QUQTYAAYg6BMKxnHHqfWjbSgA50vz4v+e8fI+kvGXmo=; b=bF7V7neZ5XoZA6i226XsHZdRVvbJh4+QuU6N10Jskt5LuKrFoYbxz3brKFNWUfaKBxN4wvhB9d/t9wexDG42u4SaTE9/hKNMWLmHtwSWsn/RiEmb134PMHLYcaV3Dq5Le1ked6CBCxFJBLtyzYh7SXnmrigcr/96HV5xACrwkNpU71DEbK2k/1F2myDyeRNrYQdQk2V8zBGWGzT7YAsc4eRM8NzVcDd/dzk5UD+eZymKnhVXMR3CMyLmf+/iy5PMr7mvWD0r9KqYLEtG9QEp9AS7WmtjnPBK1HRBW65PH4WuF1Po3ib2B4ucWp2LHzkdTfzPPm1LH60ek+sj/OUIGQ==
- Arc-seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=pass; b=M8vIbddhpuqbKtMvtf9jzoBxBYM21QC7lH32oPIeSQMFdnj6jWufyExg2S49ZJCwowAViNkFnIK/KsziFwBN8ZexHMqsFJlELdREAjkZnEKg9Z4kuSJzGDB6TRp+tYsRKgIj1P1V+b8RtXTGUPlL6x+bIrgHXoyA5uGzyk35zuM9FS/XENpKA/i4NQdtAjqvl4CFZvBcOIXB2/Pvz+CzdznY+hdUmtREjqlPBGipbvM28waTMg/l8URPi4LR0BbjHGGF7YSYjdkdIYokU0Z9GrVgZ9NrK7FEHjxLcZMN2Xcc0/iaOH2Us5095v9jLPsJZ+NG3YHwQSc/XL+fX1kY+A==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=hnyXGUDReWYO5F4fa7JlJBK22gGYEvzWFWQpErYgZugd4+Oxym6m+59wzZU8rTqWnN3URjanGe3b0+35WBqnZii2do1mm+NJQVbq7t84P5vXqkSzOEUfTN7xB+M/NY2HHFF99d3raD+9/PnD8gwy+1Pv2FzFgn9v5qEF/Pf1Xq0YHwG/6qZY6fB8yawtQtbtWQV62sB44hwbVBtz8wrVnjazSwnrXHgxTj9oA/oAWgRBrvStKw+DKVH9X3TYN0Pko9ip5cySiu1xETPagCbmRfWSYIrLFs/8lwrZCnrtPYxIseLJWI+xJXekD5R9SX7lcGAnFBmia2KKdqJeaT0k7w==
- Authentication-results-original: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=arm.com;
- Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Bertrand Marquis <Bertrand.Marquis@xxxxxxx>, Wei Chen <Wei.Chen@xxxxxxx>, Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@xxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 08:05:21 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
- Nodisclaimer: true
- Original-authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=arm.com;
- Thread-index: AQHY3q+bU7An58kRd0C18nD7mqtwpK4Nk9IAgAAAuGCAAAmOAIAAAGRggACMTgCABBWckA==
- Thread-topic: [PATCH for-4.17 1/2] docs: Document the minimal requirement of static heap
Hi Julien,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH for-4.17 1/2] docs: Document the minimal requirement
> of static heap
> >>> Is this formula somehow make sense to you? I think we need to have a
> >>> rough estimation of the last part (boot time allocation) though.
> >>
> >> That's going to be hard. It will vary depending on your system and this
> >> could change in the future as we add more features. For instance, I
> >> expect the PCI passthrough will need some memory to keep track of all
> >> the devices.
> >>
> >> I am worry the formula will become complex. Ideally we need to have a
> >> very simple formula. If that's not possible, then we need to provide a
> >> way for the user to estimate it at runtime (like what I suggested before).
> >
> > I agree, I think the simple formula can only be achieved is we have an
> > estimation of the worst case scenario of those scattered memory usages.
> > I remember I once had a try so let me try to find the results back that
> > time...
> >
> > I am also very interested in the method that you proposed to provide a
> > mechanism for users to get the system memory allocation at runtime. But
> > IIUC this needs some work in another series. Could you please confirm if I
> > am understanding correctly? Or probably Xen has some mechanisms that
> > I am likely unaware? Thanks!
>
> It will depend the way you account memory statically allocated to
> domains in Xen.
>
> We already provide the total amount of memory in the system and how
> much
> is free. The values can be retrieved using ``xl info``.
>
> * When not allocated, is this considered free or used?
> * Are they included in the total memory?
>
> If the answer is no for both (possibly just one), then we will need to
> provide extra hypercalls to expose the size of the xenheap and how much
> is free.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I will add a follow-up series for this
work. Before we have this mechanism, I think the patch 2/2 should be
dropped.
Kind regards,
Henry
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Julien Grall
|
