Mailing List Archive: Does Xen-unstable support PAE now ?

Does Xen-unstable support PAE now ?

Jul 10, 2005, 2:29 AM

Post #1 of 8 (829 views)

hi:

I had installed Xen-2.0.6 on my server DELL 2850 with 6G memory, dual Xeon
CPU, it's can't use all 6G memory, i had upgrade to Xen-unstable, it's
still can use 3.3G memory.

[root@CentOS4 ~]# xm dmesg
__ __ _____ ___ _ _
\ \/ /___ _ __ |___ / / _ \ __| | _____ _____| |
\ // _ \ '_ \ |_ \| | | |__ / _` |/ _ \ \ / / _ \ |
/ \ __/ | | | ___) | |_| |__| (_| | __/\ V / __/ |
/_/\_\___|_| |_| |____(_)___/ \__,_|\___| \_/ \___|_|

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/netos/xen
University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory

Xen version 3.0-devel (tongjian@) (gcc version 3.4.3 20050227 (Red Hat
3.4.3-
22.1)) Sun Jul 10 16:20:24 CST 2005
Latest ChangeSet:

(XEN) WARNING: Only the first 4GB of the physical memory map can be
accessed
(XEN) by Xen in 32-bit mode. Truncating the memory map...
(XEN) Physical RAM map:
(XEN) 0000000000000000 - 00000000000a0000 (usable)
(XEN) 0000000000100000 - 00000000cffc0000 (usable)
(XEN) 00000000cffc0000 - 00000000cffcfc00 (ACPI data)
(XEN) 00000000cffcfc00 - 00000000cffff000 (reserved)
(XEN) 00000000e0000000 - 00000000fec90000 (reserved)
(XEN) 00000000fed00000 - 00000000fed00400 (reserved)
(XEN) 00000000fee00000 - 00000000fee10000 (reserved)
(XEN) 00000000ffb00000 - 0000000100000000 (reserved)
(XEN) System RAM: 3327MB (3407232kB)
(XEN) Xen heap: 10MB (10668kB)
(XEN) PAE disabled.
(XEN) found SMP MP-table at 000fe710
(XEN) DMI 2.3 present.
(XEN) Using APIC driver default
(XEN) ACPI: RSDP (v000 DELL ) @ 0x000fd650
(XEN) ACPI: RSDT (v001 DELL PE BKC 0x00000001 MSFT 0x0100000a) @
0x000fd664
(XEN) ACPI: FADT (v001 DELL PE BKC 0x00000001 MSFT 0x0100000a) @
0x000fd6b0
(XEN) ACPI: MADT (v001 DELL PE BKC 0x00000001 MSFT 0x0100000a) @
0x000fd724
(XEN) ACPI: SPCR (v001 DELL PE BKC 0x00000001 MSFT 0x0100000a) @
0x000fd7cc
(XEN) ACPI: HPET (v001 DELL PE BKC 0x00000001 MSFT 0x0100000a) @
0x000fd81c
(XEN) ACPI: MCFG (v001 DELL PE BKC 0x00000001 MSFT 0x0100000a) @
0x000fd854
(XEN) ACPI: DSDT (v001 DELL PE BKC 0x00000001 MSFT 0x0100000e) @
0x00000000
(XEN) ACPI: Local APIC address 0xfee00000
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x01] lapic_id[0x00] enabled)
(XEN) Processor #0 15:4 APIC version 20
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x02] lapic_id[0x06] enabled)
(XEN) Processor #6 15:4 APIC version 20
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x03] lapic_id[0x01] enabled)
(XEN) Processor #1 15:4 APIC version 20
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x04] lapic_id[0x07] enabled)
(XEN) Processor #7 15:4 APIC version 20
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x01] high edge lint[0x1])
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x02] high edge lint[0x1])
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x03] high edge lint[0x1])
(XEN) ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x04] high edge lint[0x1])
(XEN) ACPI: IOAPIC (id[0x08] address[0xfec00000] gsi_base[0])
(XEN) IOAPIC[0]: apic_id 8, version 32, address 0xfec00000, GSI 0-23
(XEN) ACPI: IOAPIC (id[0x09] address[0xfec80000] gsi_base[32])
(XEN) IOAPIC[1]: apic_id 9, version 32, address 0xfec80000, GSI 32-55
(XEN) ACPI: IOAPIC (id[0x0a] address[0xfec83000] gsi_base[64])
(XEN) IOAPIC[2]: apic_id 10, version 32, address 0xfec83000, GSI 64-87
(XEN) ACPI: IOAPIC (id[0x0b] address[0xfec84000] gsi_base[96])
(XEN) IOAPIC[3]: apic_id 11, version 32, address 0xfec84000, GSI 96-119
(XEN) ACPI: INT_SRC_OVR (bus 0 bus_irq 0 global_irq 2 dfl dfl)
(XEN) ACPI: INT_SRC_OVR (bus 0 bus_irq 9 global_irq 9 high level)
(XEN) ACPI: IRQ0 used by override.
(XEN) ACPI: IRQ2 used by override.
(XEN) ACPI: IRQ9 used by override.
(XEN) Enabling APIC mode: Flat. Using 4 I/O APICs
(XEN) Using ACPI (MADT) for SMP configuration information
(XEN) Initializing CPU#0
(XEN) Detected 3192.319 MHz processor.
(XEN) Using scheduler: Simple EDF Scheduler (sedf)
(XEN) CPU: Trace cache: 12K uops, L1 D cache: 16K
(XEN) CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
(XEN) CPU: Physical Processor ID: 0
(XEN) CPU0: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.20GHz stepping 01
(XEN) Booting processor 1/1 eip 90000
(XEN) Initializing CPU#1
(XEN) CPU: Trace cache: 12K uops, L1 D cache: 16K
(XEN) CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
(XEN) CPU: Physical Processor ID: 0
(XEN) CPU1: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.20GHz stepping 01
(XEN) Booting processor 2/6 eip 90000
(XEN) Initializing CPU#2
(XEN) CPU: Trace cache: 12K uops, L1 D cache: 16K
(XEN) CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
(XEN) CPU: Physical Processor ID: 3
(XEN) CPU2: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.20GHz stepping 01
(XEN) Booting processor 3/7 eip 90000
(XEN) Initializing CPU#3
(XEN) CPU: Trace cache: 12K uops, L1 D cache: 16K
(XEN) CPU: L2 cache: 1024K
(XEN) CPU: Physical Processor ID: 3
(XEN) CPU3: Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 3.20GHz stepping 01
(XEN) Total of 4 processors activated.
(XEN) ENABLING IO-APIC IRQs
(XEN) ..TIMER: vector=0x31 pin1=2 pin2=-1
(XEN) checking TSC synchronization across 4 CPUs: passed.
(XEN) Time init:
(XEN) .... cpu_freq: 00000000:BE46EF60
(XEN) .... scale: 00000001:40C515C9
(XEN) .... Wall Clock: 1121013264s 120000us
(XEN) Brought up 4 CPUs
(XEN) mtrr: v2.0 (20020519)
(XEN) *** LOADING DOMAIN 0 ***
(XEN) Xen-ELF header
found:
'GUEST_OS=linux,GUEST_VER=2.6,XEN_VER=3.0,VIRT_BASE=0xC0000000,LOADER=ge
neric'
(XEN) PHYSICAL MEMORY ARRANGEMENT:
(XEN) Dom0 alloc.: 08000000->10000000
(XEN) VIRTUAL MEMORY ARRANGEMENT:
(XEN) Loaded kernel: c0100000->c040b65c
(XEN) Init. ramdisk: c040c000->c0509800
(XEN) Phys-Mach map: c050a000->c052a000
(XEN) Page tables: c052a000->c052d000
(XEN) Start info: c052d000->c052e000
(XEN) Boot stack: c052e000->c052f000
(XEN) TOTAL: c0000000->c0800000
(XEN) ENTRY ADDRESS: c0100000
(XEN) Initrd len 0xfd800, start at 0xc040c000
(XEN) Scrubbing Free RAM: ..................................done.
(XEN) *** Serial input -> DOM0 (type 'CTRL-a' three times to switch input
to
Xen).

>>>
xm info

[root@CentOS4 ~]# xm info
system : Linux
host : CentOS4
release : 2.6.11.12-xen0-2
version : #2 SMP Sun Jul 10 15:56:16 CST 2005
machine : i686
cores_per_socket : 1
threads_per_core : 2
cpu_mhz : 3192
memory : 3327
free_memory : 3169
[root@CentOS4 ~]#

_________________________________________________________________
ÏíÓÃÊÀ½çÉÏ×î´óµÄµç×ÓÓÊ¼þÏµÍ³¡ª MSN Hotmail¡£ http://www.hotmail.com

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

Re: Does Xen-unstable support PAE now ? [ In reply to ]

e.bachmann at xebec

Jul 10, 2005, 4:26 AM

Post #2 of 8 (815 views)

Permalink

Hi, I'm not using unstable, so I'm just guessing here, but:

On Sunday 10 July 2005 11:29, she11c0de she11c0de wrote:

...
> (XEN) by Xen in 32-bit mode. Truncating the memory map...
> (XEN) Physical RAM map:
> (XEN) System RAM: 3327MB (3407232kB)
> (XEN) Xen heap: 10MB (10668kB)
> (XEN) PAE disabled.

Maybe you can enable PAE while compiling the hypervisor?

Other, possibly way faster solution:
your Xeons support EM64T, right? why not run the hypervisor in 64 bit mode, so
it can access all your ram without using dirty tricks like PAE? But I'm not
sure if one can run 32 bit guests in a 64 bit xen...

/Ernst

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

Re: Does Xen-unstable support PAE now ? [ In reply to ]

mark.williamson at cl

Jul 10, 2005, 5:02 AM

Post #3 of 8 (818 views)

Permalink

On Sunday 10 July 2005 12:26, Ernst Bachmann wrote:
> Maybe you can enable PAE while compiling the hypervisor?

I think the plan was to (eventually) have a Xen that worked on in both modes
(?) I'm not sure attempts to use PAE on big memory machines will work yet
because PAE support is not complete.

> Other, possibly way faster solution:
> your Xeons support EM64T, right? why not run the hypervisor in 64 bit mode,
> so it can access all your ram without using dirty tricks like PAE? But I'm
> not sure if one can run 32 bit guests in a 64 bit xen...

You can't run 32 bit guests on 64 bit for now. It *might* happen later if
there's sufficient interest / motivation.

Cheers,
Mark

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

Re: Does Xen-unstable support PAE now ? [ In reply to ]

she11c0de at hotmail

Jul 10, 2005, 8:44 AM

Post #4 of 8 (817 views)

Permalink

>From: Mark Williamson <mark.williamson@cl.cam.ac.uk>
>To: xen-users@lists.xensource.com
>CC: "she11c0de she11c0de" <she11c0de@hotmail.com>, Ernst Bachmann
<e.bachmann@xebec.de>
>Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Does Xen-unstable support PAE now ?
>Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 13:02:51 +0100
>
>On Sunday 10 July 2005 12:26, Ernst Bachmann wrote:
> > Maybe you can enable PAE while compiling the hypervisor?
>
>I think the plan was to (eventually) have a Xen that worked on in both
modes
>(?) I'm not sure attempts to use PAE on big memory machines will work yet
>because PAE support is not complete.
>
> > Other, possibly way faster solution:
> > your Xeons support EM64T, right? why not run the hypervisor in 64 bit
mode,
> > so it can access all your ram without using dirty tricks like PAE? But
I'm
> > not sure if one can run 32 bit guests in a 64 bit xen...

Yes, my server's cpu is dual Xeon with EM64T. i think this a good idea, but
our company have plenty application developed on 32 bit environment :(

>
>You can't run 32 bit guests on 64 bit for now. It *might* happen later if
>there's sufficient interest / motivation.
>
>Cheers,
>Mark

_________________________________________________________________
ÓëÊÀ½ç¸÷µØµÄÅóÓÑ½øÐÐ½»Á÷£¬Ãâ·ÑÏÂÔØ MSN Messenger:
http://messenger.msn.com/cn

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

Re: Does Xen-unstable support PAE now ? [ In reply to ]

mark.williamson at cl

Jul 10, 2005, 8:51 AM

Post #5 of 8 (813 views)

Permalink

> > > so it can access all your ram without using dirty tricks like PAE? But
>
> I'm
>
> > > not sure if one can run 32 bit guests in a 64 bit xen...
>
> Yes, my server's cpu is dual Xeon with EM64T. i think this a good idea, but
> our company have plenty application developed on 32 bit environment :(

You'll still be able to run 32 bit applications using the usual Linux
compatibility mechanisms. You just won't be able to run a 32 bit kernel
alongside 64 bit kernels.

HTH,
Mark

>
> >You can't run 32 bit guests on 64 bit for now. It *might* happen later if
> >there's sufficient interest / motivation.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Mark
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> ÓëÊÀ½ç¸÷µØµÄÅóÓÑ½øÐÐ½»Á÷£¬Ãâ·ÑÏÂÔØ MSN Messenger:
> http://messenger.msn.com/cn
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

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

Re: Does Xen-unstable support PAE now ? [ In reply to ]

she11c0de at hotmail

Jul 10, 2005, 9:40 AM

Post #6 of 8 (818 views)

Permalink

>From: Mark Williamson <mark.williamson@cl.cam.ac.uk>
>To: xen-users@lists.xensource.com
>CC: "she11c0de she11c0de" <she11c0de@hotmail.com>, e.bachmann@xebec.de
>Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Does Xen-unstable support PAE now ?
>Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 16:51:34 +0100
>
> > > > so it can access all your ram without using dirty tricks like PAE?
But
> >
> > I'm
> >
> > > > not sure if one can run 32 bit guests in a 64 bit xen...
> >
> > Yes, my server's cpu is dual Xeon with EM64T. i think this a good idea,
but
> > our company have plenty application developed on 32 bit environment :(
>
>You'll still be able to run 32 bit applications using the usual Linux
>compatibility mechanisms. You just won't be able to run a 32 bit kernel
>alongside 64 bit kernels.
>

Get is, thank you very much.
BTW, do you know when the Xen-unstable could support PAE ?

>HTH,
>Mark
>
> >
> > >You can't run 32 bit guests on 64 bit for now. It *might* happen
later if
> > >there's sufficient interest / motivation.
> > >
> > >Cheers,
> > >Mark
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > ÓëÊÀ½ç¸÷µØµÄÅóÓÑ½øÐÐ½»Á÷£¬Ãâ·ÑÏÂÔØ MSN Messenger:
> > http://messenger.msn.com/cn
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-users mailing list
> > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com
> > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

_________________________________________________________________
ÓëÁª»úµÄÅóÓÑ½øÐÐ½»Á÷£¬ÇëÊ¹ÓÃ MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com/cn

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

Re: Does Xen-unstable support PAE now ? [ In reply to ]

mark.williamson at cl

Jul 10, 2005, 10:12 AM

Post #7 of 8 (823 views)

Permalink

> BTW, do you know when the Xen-unstable could support PAE ?

Gerd Knorr has been submitting patches for this on a regular basis. It seems
to be progressing nicely. It should certainly all be working for the 3.0
release in a couple of months.

The plan here is (initially) that you'll have to have *all* PAE guests or *no*
PAE guests. No mixing the two on one system. Again, mixing of the two could
probably be supported but only if there's sufficient demand / motivation.

Cheers,
Mark

>
> >HTH,
> >Mark
> >
> > > >You can't run 32 bit guests on 64 bit for now. It *might* happen
>
> later if
>
> > > >there's sufficient interest / motivation.
> > > >
> > > >Cheers,
> > > >Mark
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > ÓëÊÀ½ç¸÷µØµÄÅóÓÑ½øÐÐ½»Á÷£¬Ãâ·ÑÏÂÔØ MSN Messenger:
> > > http://messenger.msn.com/cn
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Xen-users mailing list
> > > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com
> > > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> ÓëÁª»úµÄÅóÓÑ½øÐÐ½»Á÷£¬ÇëÊ¹ÓÃ MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com/cn
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

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

Re: [Xen-devel] Does Xen-unstable support PAE now ? [ In reply to ]

Keir.Fraser at cl

Jul 10, 2005, 10:15 AM

Post #8 of 8 (821 views)

Permalink

On 10 Jul 2005, at 10:29, she11c0de she11c0de wrote:

> I had installed Xen-2.0.6 on my server DELL 2850 with 6G memory, dual
> Xeon CPU, it's can't use all 6G memory, i had upgrade to Xen-unstable,
> it's still can use 3.3G memory.

You need to wait for PAE support to stabilise. Realistically, expect to
wait for the official 3.0 release.

-- Keir

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