From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Glauber de Oliveira Costa Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] memory_map + set_memmap_limit hypercall/domctl Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 10:40:15 -0200 Message-ID: <20061129124015.GC23434@redhat.com> References: <20061127185655.GC6848@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Keir Fraser Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org > The fallbacks in XENMEM_memory_map are pointless. Any stable Xen version > that implements this hypercall will be matched with a corresponding new > enough tool stack that sets memmap_limit. I think we should continue to > ENOSYS if memmap_limit has not in fact been specified. Done. > The addition of 8MB slack is policy that doesn't belong in Xen. Stick it in > the top-level caller (XendDomainInfo). In fact it probably belongs in the > ImnageHandler in image.py, as it's more easily overridden on a per-arch and > per-image-type basis there. ImageHandler does not seem to be aware of any distinction between current memory and the maximum memory a guest can get. Adding it seems much more work than it requires, so I put it in XenDomainInfo. Is that okay? Patch follows soon. -- Glauber de Oliveira Costa Red Hat Inc. "Free as in Freedom"