From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libxl_set_memory_target: only remove
 videoram from absolute targets
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 13:22:54 +0000
Message-ID: <1422451374.14124.37.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1422290831-7624-1-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1422290831-7624-1-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, wei.liu2@citrix.com, dslutz@verizon.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Mon, 2015-01-26 at 16:47 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> If the new target is relative to the current target, do not remove
> videoram again: it has already been removed from the current target.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>

How does this relate to "libxl_set_memory_target: retain the same maxmem
offset on top of the current target"? Doesn't that also achieve the same
aim, since maxmem accounts for vram but target doesn't?

Ian.