From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [OSSTEST Nested PATCH v10 6/9] Changes on test step
 of Debian hvm guest install
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 10:00:31 +0100
Message-ID: <1432630831.14664.61.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1431488204-14510-1-git-send-email-longtaox.pang@intel.com>
	<1431488204-14510-7-git-send-email-longtaox.pang@intel.com>
	<1432130159.12989.262.camel@citrix.com>
	<86C3224E41A7434B904EC364302132D80E4AF023@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.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: <86C3224E41A7434B904EC364302132D80E4AF023@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.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: "Pang, LongtaoX" <longtaox.pang@intel.com>
Cc: "wei.liu2@citrix.com" <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, "Hu,
	Robert" <robert.hu@intel.com>, "Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com" <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 08:53 +0000, Pang, LongtaoX wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ian Campbell [mailto:ian.campbell@citrix.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 9:56 PM
> > To: Pang, LongtaoX
> > Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org; Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com; wei.liu2@citrix.com; Hu,
> > Robert
> > Subject: Re: [OSSTEST Nested PATCH v10 6/9] Changes on test step of Debian hvm
> > guest install
> > 
> > On Wed, 2015-05-13 at 11:36 +0800, longtao.pang wrote:
> > > @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ d-i partman-auto/expert_recipe string \\
> > >                          use_filesystem{ } filesystem{ vfat } \\
> > >                          mountpoint{ /boot/efi } \\
> > >                  . \\
> > > -                5000 50 5000 ext4 \\
> > > +                10000 50 10000 ext4 \\
> > 
> > These three numbers are
> > 
> > <limits>::=<minimal size>_<priority>_<maximal size>_<parted fs>
> > 
> > (from
> > http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/d-i/debian-installer.git/tree/doc/devel/partman-a
> > uto-recipe.txt)
> > 
> > So here you are increasing the minimum size of the root partition for
> > all debianhvm domains (including non-nested ones and L2 guests) from 5G
> > to 10G.
> > 
> > Did you test this with a normal L1 debianhvm guest (not one destined to
> > be an L1 host). i.e. using test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64 ?
> > 
> > The new size you have given is the same size as the entire disk in that
> > case. I'm not sure what will then happen...
> > 
> > Perhaps "5000 50 -1 ext4" does what you need, namely leaves the minimum
> > alone and sets the maximum to unlimited, which I think will end up
> > making this partition as big as the disk less the configured swap space.
> > 
> > Ian.
> I have ever used 'Debian-7.6.0-amd64-DVD-1.iso' as debianhvm_image which is 3.7G. 
> At that time, it's necessary to extend L1 guest's rootf size to '10000' to store the image.
> Currently, I use 'Debian-7.2.0-amd64-CD-1.iso' as debianhvm_image which is just 624M,
> the origin rootfs size of '5000' is sufficient to store this image and I have tried that it works fine for nested job.
> So, it's no need to extend guest's rootfs size anymore.

OK, great, that should simplify things in the series.

Ian.