Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1522814
| From | Alex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries |
| Date | 2016-11-15 16:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sDNQl-6Go-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <sDGvw-1V4-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <sDHBf-2C3-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <sDHBf-2C3-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <sDIH0-3dJ-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <sDIH0-3dJ-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 10:55:49AM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote: > I'd go with the new error code. What about E2BIG or ENOSPC? > > I think the hypervisor should fill in the number of entries required > in this case. > > In case nobody objects I can post patches for this purpose (both Xen > and Linux). This sounds like a good solution to me. I think it's definitely more appropriate than simply bumping up the size of xen_e820_map, especially considering the fact that it's theoretically possible for the e820 map generated by the hypercall to grow too large, even on a non-EFI machine, where my change would have no effect. Thanks for your input! - Alex
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC PATCH] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries Alex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com> - 2016-11-15 01:20 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2016-11-15 07:40 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> - 2016-11-15 08:20 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2016-11-15 08:40 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> - 2016-11-15 09:10 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2016-11-15 09:50 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> - 2016-11-15 10:50 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2016-11-15 11:00 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> - 2016-11-15 11:50 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2016-11-15 12:10 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> - 2016-11-15 12:20 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries Alex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com> - 2016-11-15 16:30 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH] xen/x86: Increase xen_e820_map to E820_X_MAX possible entries Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> - 2016-11-16 07:10 +0100
csiph-web