| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH][HVM] fix VNIF restore failure on HVMguestwit
|
To: |
Steven Hand <Steven.Hand@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Mark Williamson <mark.williamson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH][HVM] fix VNIF restore failure on HVMguestwith heavy workload |
|
From: |
Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Fri, 13 Apr 2007 10:42:19 +0100 |
|
Cc: |
Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Zhai, Edwin" <edwin.zhai@xxxxxxxxx>, Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Zhao, Fan" <fan.zhao@xxxxxxxxx>, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Fri, 13 Apr 2007 02:41:17 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<E1Hc4Nt-0001kG-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
|
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
Thread-index: |
Acd9sAcWRYoSX+mjEdu6zAAX8io7RQ== |
|
Thread-topic: |
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH][HVM] fix VNIF restore failure on HVMguestwith heavy workload |
|
User-agent: |
Microsoft-Entourage/11.3.3.061214 |
On 12/4/07 19:51, "Steven Hand" <Steven.Hand@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Any reason not to have the balloon driver write back to Xenstore if it's
>> used in this way. Or is it just waiting for a patch to do that?
>
> You also need xend to watch the node and update its internal structures,
> but otherwise that'd be fine.
We're not sure if this is even sensible in all cases. Should an admin memory
setting be overridable by a setting derived from the guest itself?
One sensible middle ground might be for the balloon driver to ignore the
memory-target field in xenstore if the balloon target has ever been
specified via /proc/xen/balloon. This would indicate that the guest is
taking control for its own memory setting and is a simple resolution of the
conflict over whose setting takes precedence. This might be good enough for
those people who would like us to keep the /proc/xen/balloon method (I was
considering killing it off entirely) -- I suspect people either want to
control their guest memory settings inside the guests *or* via 'xm mem-set':
not both.
-- Keir
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home