On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 15:01:16 -0400
Gabriel L. Somlo gso...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 04:36:12PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
After memory hotplug is in I might add e820 entries after above_4g
for present at boot hotpluggable DIMMDevices. They would have 1:1 mapping
i.e.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:28:30AM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 15:01:16 -0400
Gabriel L. Somlo gso...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 04:36:12PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
After memory hotplug is in I might add e820 entries after above_4g
for present
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 11:14:35 -0400
Gabriel Somlo gso...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:28:30AM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 15:01:16 -0400
Gabriel L. Somlo gso...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 04:36:12PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 06:51:05PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
1. is it safe to assume that E820_RAM (start_addr, size) entries are
non-overlapping and sorted by increasing start_addr ?
They might overlap, grep for e820_add_entry(). If you interested in
what kernel does with such table look
| Type16 0x1000 |
^ ^ ^ ^
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 09:04:52AM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
Should we just assert((ram_size 10) 0x8000), and officially
limit guests to 2T ?
No. Not fully sure what reasonable behavier would be in case more than
2T are present. I guess either not generating type16 entries at all or
On Thu, 13 Mar 2014 10:37:52 -0400
Gabriel L. Somlo gso...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 09:04:52AM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
Should we just assert((ram_size 10) 0x8000), and officially
limit guests to 2T ?
No. Not fully sure what reasonable behavier would be in case
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 04:36:12PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
After memory hotplug is in I might add e820 entries after above_4g
for present at boot hotpluggable DIMMDevices. They would have 1:1 mapping
i.e. t19-t20-t17 and belong only to 1 node.
Any idea what the max size could be for each
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 02:24:54PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
On Mi, 2014-03-12 at 09:05 -0400, Gabriel L. Somlo wrote:
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 09:27:18AM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
I think we should just use e820_table (see pc.c) here. Loop over it and
add a type 19 table for each ram
