From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de>
Subject: Re: Re: non-contiguous allocations
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 14:43:14 +0200
Message-ID: <20110509124314.GA19179@aepfle.de>
References: <20110506181234.GA24767@aepfle.de>
	<C9EA00AE.176D4%keir.xen@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <C9EA00AE.176D4%keir.xen@gmail.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: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Fri, May 06, Keir Fraser wrote:

> On 06/05/2011 19:12, "Olaf Hering" <olaf@aepfle.de> wrote:
> >  From which pool should the per-cpu tracebuffers
> > get allocated?  alloc_domheap_page() wants a domain, so I think thats
> > the wrong interface.
> 
> Yes, sticking with alloc_xenheap_pages() is good.

Another question:
alloc_trace_bufs() calls alloc_xenheap_pages(0, MEMF_bits(32 + PAGE_SHIFT));

MEMF_bits() is not used in the i386 codepath in alloc_heap_pages(),
unless I miss something.
Otherwise alloc_domheap_pages() is called, which passes BITS_PER_LONG
instead of 32 to domain_clamp_alloc_bitsize().

Is the hardcoded 32+PAGE_SHIFT required in some way, or could I just use
the alloc_xenheap_page() macro and let alloc_domheap_pages() deal with
allocation details?

Olaf