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/
Home Products Support Community News


[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] [XEND] abstract architecture-specific bits in im

To: Ewan Mellor <ewan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] [XEND] abstract architecture-specific bits in image.py
From: Hollis Blanchard <hollisb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:27:58 -0500
Cc: Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-ppc-devel <xen-ppc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:27:51 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20060829221630.GC16356@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: IBM Linux Technology Center
References: <fcf9104665f59d886733.1155763682@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1156283455.8683.90.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060829221630.GC16356@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 23:16 +0100, Ewan Mellor wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 04:50:54PM -0500, Hollis Blanchard wrote:
> > Since this patch wasn't committed, the shadow2 changes created
> > conflicts. Here is the respin. Note that I have not tested with shadow2,
> > but as you can see below the math doesn't need to be so complicated.
> > 
> > Ewan, please apply or comment.
> Applied, thanks Hollis.  Is this your only outstanding patch? I got lost
> when you rev'd this one a couple of times ;-)

Thanks Ewan! I will have another patch for you shortly. :)

Actually there was one bug we discovered as a result of the shadow
merge: shadow_mem_control's arguments should be MB, not bytes. Here's
the pseudo-diff:
-            shadow_cur = xc.shadow_mem_control(self.domid, shadow_kb * 1024)
+            shadow_cur = xc.shadow_mem_control(self.domid, shadow_kb / 1024)

Hollis Blanchard
IBM Linux Technology Center

Xen-devel mailing list