WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-ia64-devel

Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] steal_page(MEMF_no_refcount) page->count_info no lo

To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] steal_page(MEMF_no_refcount) page->count_info no longer consistent
From: Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 11:59:27 +0900
Cc: xen-ia64-devel <xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 18:58:44 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1172706927.5703.36.camel@lappy>
List-help: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Discussion of the ia64 port of Xen <xen-ia64-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <1172706927.5703.36.camel@lappy>
Sender: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 04:55:27PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:

>    Current xen-unstable.hg tip has a problem booting dom0 that I'd like
> your opinion on.  We're failing the check in steal_page() that ensures
> that count_info is 2 when called with the MEMF_no_refcount flag.  In
> fact, it seems that steal_page() is now getting called for pages that
> have a count_info of 1 or 2.  Are we being overly paranoid with this
> check, or is this an indication of a deeper problem?  The change seems
> to have been introduced by the recent memory allocator changes which
> removed the bit width restrictions.  Thanks,

By the coarse code check, I couldn't find the case that count_info = 1
with MEMF_no_refcount can occur.
The reference count semantics seems to have been changed in a subtle way.
I'll try to reproduce it and take a deeper look into it.
-- 
yamahata

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>