Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1532937 > unrolled thread

[RFC PATCH v2] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries

Started byAlex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com>
First post2016-11-30 04:30 +0100
Last post2016-11-30 04:30 +0100
Articles 1 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  [RFC PATCH v2] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries Alex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com> - 2016-11-30 04:30 +0100

#1532937 — [RFC PATCH v2] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries

FromAlex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com>
Date2016-11-30 04:30 +0100
Subject[RFC PATCH v2] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries
Message-ID<sJ3KO-zy-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
Here's the second round of my patches to fix up the problems that we're
seeing with the XENMEM_machine_memory_map hypercall.  These few simple
changes, to give xen_e820_map some extra space, get things working fine
on our large machine.

This version of the patchset adds a patch to remove the #ifdef
CONFIG_EFI conditional around the definition of E820_X_MAX, so that it's
always slightly larger than E820MAX.  I've also tweaked the code that
works on xen_e820_map to use ARRAY_SIZE(xen_e820_map) instead of using
E820_X_MAX directly, as suggested by Boris.

As always, I appreciate any input that others can give!

- Alex

Alex Thorlton (2):
  x86: Make E820_X_MAX unconditionally larger than E820MAX
  xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries

 arch/x86/include/asm/e820.h | 8 +++-----
 arch/x86/xen/setup.c        | 6 +++---
 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

-- 
1.8.5.6

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web