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
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
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---
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
10 matches
Mail list logo