From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: upstream merge status for 2.6.35, .36? Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 14:07:24 -0400 Message-ID: <20100607180724.GA16928@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <20100604223929.GA8819@orion.carnet.hr> <4C099836.1050903@goop.org> <20100607074811.GV17817@reaktio.net> <20100607083201.GA16443@orion.carnet.hr> <20100607145743.GB5085@phenom.dumpdata.com> <20100607171218.GA9289@orion.carnet.hr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100607171218.GA9289@orion.carnet.hr> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Josip Rodin Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 07:12:18PM +0200, Josip Rodin wrote: > On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 10:57:43AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > > so the end-result should be bulletproof (as much as it can be :). > > > > There are some outstanding issues that we know of. I hadn't yet gotten > > my head around them, but here is a list of Xen PCI frontend bugs: > > > > 1). Pass in 4GB or more to DomU. All the memory that the guest sees are > > RAM and there are no "holes" for the PCI devices, akin to what you have > > on a normal machine (the hole is 256MB and it shifts 256MB of RAM above > > the 4GB - we don't do that yet in DomU). Workaround: use less memory, or > > some magic Linux kernel parameter (memhole?) to create a hole. > > Does this just mean you can't have PCI frontend in those domUs? Yes you can, except you are limited to 4GB for each guest. > IOW it may be a regression compared to Xen .18, but not compared to what's > in mainline at the moment? The issue is that Linux 2.6.18 had a different system for resources structs, which in .31 changed. It is not a Xen specific issue, but rather how the Linux kernel sets up resources structures from the E820 map.