Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932861AbbGJPHJ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 10 Jul 2015 11:07:09 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55784 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S932347AbbGJPHA (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 10 Jul 2015 11:07:00 -0400
Message-ID: <559FDF8F.1020109@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 17:06:55 +0200
From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, Bandan Das <bsd@redhat.com>
CC: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Add host physical address width capability
References: <jpg615ul1j8.fsf@linux.bootlegged.copy> <559E101A.7080601@redhat.com> <559E180E.8080308@redhat.com> <559E6BE5.4030000@redhat.com> <jpgy4ip6v1y.fsf@linux.bootlegged.copy> <559EC3FC.8050204@redhat.com> <559FD30C.4000209@redhat.com> <559FDD44.1020008@redhat.com> <559FDDC7.3060306@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <559FDDC7.3060306@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1742
Lines: 48

On 07/10/15 16:59, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 
> 
> On 10/07/2015 16:57, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>>>> ... In any case, please understand that I'm not campaigning for this
>>>> warning :) IIRC the warning was your (very welcome!) idea after I
>>>> reported the problem; I'm just trying to ensure that the warning match
>>>> the exact issue I encountered.
>>>
>>> Yup.  I think the right thing to do would be to hide memory above the
>>> limit.
>> How so?
>>
>> - The stack would not be doing what the user asks for. Pass -m <a_lot>,
>> and the guest would silently see less memory. If the user found out,
>> he'd immediately ask (or set out debugging) why. I think if the user's
>> request cannot be satisfied, the stack should fail hard.
> 
> That's another possibility.  I think both of them are wrong depending on
> _why_ you're using "-m <a lot>" in the first place.
> 
> Considering that this really happens (on Xeons) only for 1TB+ guests,

I reported this issue because I ran into it with a ~64GB guest. From my
/proc/cpuinfo:

model name      : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU       M 620  @ 2.67GHz
address sizes   : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual

I was specifically developing 64GB+ support for OVMF, and this
limitation caused me to think that there was a bug in my OVMF patches.
(There wasn't.) An error message from QEMU, advising me to turn off EPT,
would have saved me many hours.

Thanks
Laszlo

> it's probably just for debugging and then hiding the memory makes some
> sense.
> 
> Paolo
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/