From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Samuel Thibault Subject: Re: maximum size of a block device in a domU Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:29:28 +0100 Message-ID: <20080722092928.GA4447@implementation.uk.xensource.com> References: <20080721113021.2329B522AD@smtp.l00-bugdead-prods.de> <7F0FB2108857B5449321AEA91CF47903185A7C225C@hkgmail01.lsi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7F0FB2108857B5449321AEA91CF47903185A7C225C@hkgmail01.lsi.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: "Jayaraman, Bhaskar" Cc: Sebastian Reitenbach , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Jayaraman, Bhaskar, le Tue 22 Jul 2008 13:18:23 +0800, a =E9crit : > Hi, if I were using Xen 3.2.1 and above and if I were to direct assign = a block device to a HVM guest will I still play by the rules mentioned be= low for maximum size of the device? If by "direct assign" you mean setting disk =3D [ 'phy:sda4,hda,w' ] in the config file, then yes you are still going through the IDE emulation, limited to 2^48 sectors, i.e. 2^57B, plus the dom0 limitations (and the HVM domU limitations of course). Samuel