From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Y. D." <duyuyang@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RE: Different: nr_pages vs. max_pfn
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 20:22:02 +0800
Message-ID: <200811192016153519002@gmail.com>
References: <200811191745479618049@gmail.com>,
	<C54992D3.1F600%keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: "Jayaraman, Bhaskar" <Bhaskar.Jayaraman@lsi.com>, Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com>, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

>The shared_info value is set up by the guest itself during boot. It's larger
>because Linux adds extra space at the end of its p2m map for backend
>drivers.

I tested for various memories, i.e. 64M and 128M, the extra memory is 8M unchanged.
Also, I tested the extra 8M memory is dispersed in the p2m map, not at the end totally.
Can we say the p2m mapping table stays put during dom's lifecycle?

Thanks, keir.

Shawn