All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: "wangxin (U)" <wangxinxin.wang@huawei.com>,
	"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Cc: Fanhenglong <fanhenglong@huawei.com>,
	"wei.liu2@citrix.com" <wei.liu2@citrix.com>,
	"Hanweidong (Randy)" <hanweidong@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: BUG: failed to save x86 HVM guest with 1TB ram
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 19:50:49 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55F07F89.7040008@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8ADDA2EB7601DA429B6B2A43EF4620A51D934F45@szxeml556-mbs.china.huawei.com>

On 08/09/15 03:28, wangxin (U) wrote:
>
>> The check serves a dual purpose.  In the legacy case, it is to avoid
>> clobbering the upper bits of pfn information with pfn type information
>> for 32bit toolstacks;  any PFN above 2^28 would have type information
>> clobbering the upper bits.  This has been mitigated somewhat in
>> migration v2, as pfns are strictly 64bit values, still using the upper 4
>> bits for type information, allowing 60 bits for the PFN itself.
>>
>> The second purpose is just as a limit on toolstack resources. Migration
>> requires allocating structures which scale linearly with the size of the
>> VM; the biggest of which would be ~1GB for the p2m. Added to this is
>>   >1GB for the m2p, and suddenly a 32bit toolstack process is looking
>> scarce on RAM.
>>
>> During the development of migration v2, I didn't spend any time
>> considering if or how much it was sensible to lift the restriction by,
>> so the check was imported wholesale from the legacy code.
>>
>> For now, I am going to say that it simply doesn't work.  Simply upping
>> the limit is only a stopgap measure; an HVM guest can still mess this up
> Will the stopgap measure work in xen 4.5?

I don't know - try it.

>
>> by playing physmap games and mapping a page of ram at a really high
>> (guest) physical address.  Longterm, we need hypervisor support for
>> getting a compressed view of guest physical address space, so toolstack
>> side resources are proportional to the amount of RAM given to the guest,
>> not to how big a guest decides to make its physmap.
> Is that in your further work?

It is on the list, but no idea if/how it would be done at the moment.

~Andrew

      reply	other threads:[~2015-09-09 18:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-09-07  8:09 BUG: failed to save x86 HVM guest with 1TB ram wangxin (U)
2015-09-07  9:48 ` Andrew Cooper
2015-09-08  2:28   ` wangxin (U)
2015-09-09 18:50     ` Andrew Cooper [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=55F07F89.7040008@citrix.com \
    --to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=fanhenglong@huawei.com \
    --cc=hanweidong@huawei.com \
    --cc=wangxinxin.wang@huawei.com \
    --cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.