[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] compiling a non-pae dom0 on a dell r710 with too much ram

  • To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
  • From: Mike Sun <msun@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 6 May 2010 20:09:58 -0400
  • Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Thu, 06 May 2010 17:10:29 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=vXKA9ULH3Tvht1YknO7hBIi6/JvudCmePQVgJgN7fGK8fUrXe2nM2KTDAfPOK7p7AV aIejBqRseHAPa9DAfw9FuUWPNrmq2hyCPTmb7mzhXeRTDghFzYawO1K74z5nJzsK6fg8 GJauZss7MCVDtPlnTH0gKtcSHPS2n26g4+T3A=
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

It's based off the kernel.  Reason I can't have PAE is
because I had written some code a while back that touched shadow page
table stuff and I made changes assuming PAE wasn't being used.  I
don't think my code will work with PAE turned on.

On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 8:05 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 05/06/2010 04:50 PM, Mike Sun wrote:
>> I'm working with Xen 3.2.2 so I believe it does support PAE 32-bit PV 
>> operation
> Yes, it seems to have been dropped in 3.3.
> Which kernel are you using? ÂI think all recent kernels have also
> dropped support for non-PAE PV operation, so you would probably have to
> go back to a kernel of that era to get non-PAE support.
> But I'm not really sure what relevance PAE has to what you really want
> to test. ÂLimited memory is a side-effect of non-PAE operation, but if
> that's what you're concerned about you can easily limit memory size
> (either by telling Xen to only use 4G of the system's memory, or by
> limiting dom0 to 4G).
> Â ÂJ

Xen-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.