Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] PATCH: xencomm [2]

2006-10-02 Thread Akio Takebe
Hi, Aron However on ia64 this isn't sufficient. We need either for the modules to load *earlier* (such as in the initramfs) or we need to use dom0_mem=1G (for example) I have some questions, though: 1. On x86, all of the memory is assigned to dom0, then it balloons to give memory to

Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] PATCH: xencomm [2]

2006-10-02 Thread Akio Takebe
Hi, Aron I checked the fragmentation on xen/ia64 with on xen/x86. The following data is /proc/budddyinfo after starting each daemons. 1. buddyinfo of ia64 at the boottime. (dom0_mem=512MB) Mon Oct 2 20:42:24 JST 2006 --iptables--- Node 0, zone DMA 1 2 1

Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] PATCH: xencomm [2]

2006-10-02 Thread Aron Griffis
Akio Takebe wrote: [Mon Oct 02 2006, 08:45:22AM EDT] The following data is /proc/budddyinfo after starting each daemons. 1. buddyinfo of ia64 at the boottime. (dom0_mem=512MB) Mon Oct 2 20:42:24 JST 2006 ---iptables---Node 0, zone DMA 1 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 9 ---portmap---

Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] PATCH: xencomm [2]

2006-09-29 Thread Tristan Gingold
Le Vendredi 29 Septembre 2006 16:14, Aron Griffis a écrit : Hi Tristan, Tristan Gingold wrote: [Thu Sep 28 2006, 07:33:28AM EDT] My tests were booting dom0+2*dom_U (using netbk, blkbk and netloop as modules), and doing ping+wget from domU_1. I tested these patches on the Fedora rawhide

Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] PATCH: xencomm [2]

2006-09-29 Thread Akio Takebe
Hi, Aron I think this issue do not relate xencomm and copy_from/to_user. This issue is caused by page_alloc of net/blkbk module. order:8 is too big. After forked and terminated some process, alloc_page() of oder:8 almost fail. So builtin module don't have this issue because none of process is

Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] PATCH: xencomm [2]

2006-09-29 Thread Tristan Gingold
Le Vendredi 29 Septembre 2006 16:35, Akio Takebe a écrit : Hi, Aron I think this issue do not relate xencomm and copy_from/to_user. This issue is caused by page_alloc of net/blkbk module. order:8 is too big. After forked and terminated some process, alloc_page() of oder:8 almost fail. So

Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] PATCH: xencomm [2]

2006-09-29 Thread Aron Griffis
Tristan Gingold wrote: [Fri Sep 29 2006, 10:44:48AM EDT] Does this bug occur on x86 ? No. Aron ___ Xen-ia64-devel mailing list Xen-ia64-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel

Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] PATCH: xencomm [2]

2006-09-29 Thread Akio Takebe
Hi, Aron Tristan Gingold wrote: [Fri Sep 29 2006, 10:44:48AM EDT] Does this bug occur on x86 ? No. Aron Hmmm... But this issue was happened on x86-PAE. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201796 Actually with dom0_mem=512M on FC6-ia64, we can success installing blkbk on rare

Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] PATCH: xencomm [2]

2006-09-29 Thread Aron Griffis
Akio Takebe wrote: [Fri Sep 29 2006, 11:41:57AM EDT] Hmmm... But this issue was happened on x86-PAE. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201796 Actually with dom0_mem=512M on FC6-ia64, we can success installing blkbk on rare occasions. On PAE the problem was fixed by

Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] PATCH: xencomm [2]

2006-09-28 Thread Akio Takebe
Hi, Tristan I tried to test your patches. And I don't meet the network issue. good work!!! I'll try to test my network load test. I had some unaligned access message. For your infomation, I show the log. PING 10.124.36.60 (10.124.36.60) 56(84) bytes of data. kernel unaligned access to