From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Scott Parish" Subject: Re: bitopts functions overflowing page boundarys Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 09:25:02 +0000 Message-ID: <20050528092502.GA24403@us.ibm.com> References: <20050528044320.GA9951@us.ibm.com> <20050528090422.GB9951@us.ibm.com> <5376ad69acc3fea510abc0ee527f1e97@cl.cam.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5376ad69acc3fea510abc0ee527f1e97@cl.cam.ac.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Keir Fraser Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Scott Parish List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 10:51:06AM +0100, Keir Fraser wrote: > > On 28 May 2005, at 10:04, Scott Parish wrote: > > >o problem when dom0_mem is less then 2048K; at exactly 2048 we hit > >the next sized "order" which can't be fulfilled from the 0x100-0xdff60 > >range. All initial allocation for dom0 that i've seen that fall in the > >"usable" above the hole have the problem i described. > > > >Setting, > > > > max_page = init_e820(e820_raw, &e820_raw_nr) - 1; > > > >seems to unravel a number of things. shall i preceed to figure out > >what all, or is such still needed? > > No, I guess this situation just isn't as unlikely as I though it would > be. :-) > > I checked in a fixed up bitops.h that should fix the problem for you > without needing new bitop functions. splendid! sRp -- Scott Parish Signed-off-by: srparish@us.ibm.com