From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de>
Subject: [PATCH 0 of 3] xentrace updates
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 20:04:32 +0200
Message-ID: <patchbomb.1301508272@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.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: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
Cc: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org


Three more minor corrections to trace.c. The formula used the already
calculated offset of the array for multiplication, and the max number of pages
per cpu could wrap.

However, its not possible to allocate the MAX_ORDER (which is 9 on x86) for
each cpu (just for verification) on a box with 8 cpus. If booted with
tbuf_size=8192 alloc fails on the 4th cpu, at runtime already on the second.
What is the reason for that, which pool of pages is too small?

Olaf