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-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] Question regarding SLAB corruption

To: Roland Dreier <rdreier@xxxxxxxxx>, Lukas Hejtmanek <xhejtman@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Question regarding SLAB corruption
From: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 23:30:12 +0100
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 15:24:57 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <adaodilw8em.fsf@xxxxxxxxx>
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>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcfCeLas9RtSXi5rEdybDQAWy6hiGQ==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] Question regarding SLAB corruption
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.3.3.061214
On 9/7/07 22:53, "Roland Dreier" <rdreier@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Although I'm a little confused about the earlier parts of the story.
> Why was it necessary to force the use of swiotlb?  Shouldn't things
> work by default?

A swiotlb is a pre-allocated bounce-buffer region, so it has a memory cost
even if it's not actually used. Hence we do not create one by default for a
domU -- it has to be forced. Perhaps we could work out some way to detect
whether a swiotlb is likely to be needed, but our BUG_ON() messages are
pretty clear about why they are BUGging, and I considered that good enough.

> And is there any more intelligent way to give big chunks of system
> memory to a PCI device for exclusive use?

Perhaps dma_alloc_coherent/pci_alloc_consistent? These always return
machine-contiguous memory. I'm not sure if their use in this way would be an
abuse of the DMA API, though.

 -- Keir


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