From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jan Beulich" Subject: Re: New heap API and scrubbing Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 08:22:27 +0000 Message-ID: <49914753.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline 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 , Dan Magenheimer Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >>> Dan Magenheimer 10.02.09 01:24 >>> >So in the new (soon-to-be 3.4) heap API, are > >alloc_domheap_pages(NULL,order,flags) > >and > >alloc_xenheap_pages(order,flags) > >synonomous on 64-bit hypervisors? I.e. they >are allocating from the same pool of pages? I thought thee was a small difference, but in looking at the code it seems there isn't at present. The difference I though would be there was that alloc_xenheap_pages() should be allowed to access MEMZONE_XEN, while alloc_domheap_pages() should only start allocating at MEMZONE_XEN+1. That way, by default Xen heap allocations would eat from the domain heap, but if that's empty would be allowed to fall back to the low memory = portion. Keir? >And if so are the matching free routines >synonomous? No, because PGC_xen_heap must be cleared on pages allocated through alloc_xenheap_pages(). Jan