From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mukesh Rathor Subject: Re: dom0 boot failure with 256G Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 19:48:12 -0700 Message-ID: <4848A56C.7000603@oracle.com> References: Reply-To: mukesh.rathor@oracle.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: 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: "Kurt C. Hackel" , Ian Pratt , xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Keir Fraser wrote: > > > On 5/6/08 08:24, "Keir Fraser" wrote: > >>> 256GB is more than a 32b dom0 can handle. Presumably it works if you set >>> dom0_mem= to something smaller? >>> >>> We should probably make the clipping of dom0 memory to something like >>> 64GB automatic. >> Xen ought to have crashed during dom0 build in that case, being unable to >> allocate enough memory of the restricted address width supported by the 32b >> dom0 guest. I agree that dom0_mem should be automatically intelligently >> clamped. Currently nr_pages is clamped to UINT_MAX (!) for a 32b dom0, which >> is still rather a big number. > > Actually compat guests are good for up to 128GB, so you should be fine with > no dom0_mem= parameter. > > -- Keir > No, it crashed without dom0_mem paramater after I fixed the physaddr_bitsize in construct_dom0(). It looked like it was allocating almost 256G to dom0... things are fine now with dom0_mem= specified. thanks mukesh