Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Solved the Xen PV/KASLR riddle

From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
Date: Fri Aug 29 2014 - 10:56:18 EST

On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 03:44:06PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 29.08.14 at 16:27, <stefan.bader@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Sure. Btw, someone also contacted me saying they have the same problem
> > without
> > changing the layout but having really big initrd (500M). While that feels
> > like
> > it should be impossible (if the kernel+initrd+xen stuff has to fix the 512M
> > kernel image size area then). But if it can happen, then surely it does
> > cause
> > mappings to be where the module space starts then.
> Since the initrd doesn't really need to be mapped into the (limited)
> virtual address space a pv guest starts with, we specifically got
> /*
> * Whether or not the guest can deal with being passed an initrd not
> * mapped through its initial page tables.
> */
> to deal with that situation. The hypervisor side for Dom0 is in place,
> and the kernel side works in our (classic) kernels. Whether it got
> implemented for DomU meanwhile I don't know; I'm pretty certain
> pv-ops kernels don't support it so far.

Correct - Not implemented. Here is what I had mentioned in the past:

at that but I can't figure out a nice way of implementing this
without the usage of SPARSEMAP_VMAP virtual addresses - which is how
the classic Xen does it. But then - I don't know who is using huge PV
guests - as the PVHVM does a fine job? But then with PVH, now you can
boot with large amount of memory (1TB?) - so some of these issues
would go away? Except the 'large ramdisk' as that would eat in the
MODULES_VADDR I think? Needs more thinking.

.. and then I left it and to my suprise saw on Luis's slides that
Jurgen is going to take a look at that (500GB support).

> Jan
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at