Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH net-next v7 4/9] xen-netback: Introduce TX grant mapping

[Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 13/03/14 10:17, Ian Campbell wrote:
> Pulling out this one comment for the attention on the core Xen/Linux
> maintainers.
>
> On Thu, 2014-03-06 at 21:48 +0000, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
> [...]
> > @@ -343,8 +347,26 @@ struct xenvif *xenvif_alloc(struct device *parent, domid_t 
> > domid,
> >         vif->pending_prod = MAX_PENDING_REQS;
> >         for (i = 0; i < MAX_PENDING_REQS; i++)
> >                 vif->pending_ring[i] = i;
> > -       for (i = 0; i < MAX_PENDING_REQS; i++)
> > -               vif->mmap_pages[i] = NULL;
> > +       spin_lock_init(&vif->callback_lock);
> > +       spin_lock_init(&vif->response_lock);
> > +       /* If ballooning is disabled, this will consume real memory, so you
> > +        * better enable it. The long term solution would be to use just a
> > +        * bunch of valid page descriptors, without dependency on ballooning
> > +        */
> I wonder if we ought to enforce this via Kconfig? i.e. making
> CONFIG_XEN_BACKEND (or the individual backends) depend on BALLOON (or
> select?) or by making CONFIG_XEN_BALLOON non-optional etc.
I support this idea, but let's have other's views.
> IIRC David V was looking into a solution involving auto hotplugging a
> new region to use for this case, but then I guess
> CONFIG_XEN_BALLOON_MEMORY_HOTPLUG would equally need to be enabled.
Yes, if that happens in the near future, we shouldn't be bothered by the 
above right now.
> > +       err = alloc_xenballooned_pages(MAX_PENDING_REQS,
> > +                                      vif->mmap_pages,
> > +                                      false);
> [...]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel