Re: [PATCH v7 2/4] virtio_balloon: introduce migration primitives to balloon pages

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 04:56:59PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 08/14/2012 04:54 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> 
> >To clarify, the global state that this patch adds, is ugly
> >even if we didn't support multiple balloons yet.
> >So I don't think I can accept such a patch.
> >Rusty has a final word here, maybe he thinks differently.
> 
> Before deciding that "does not support multiple balloon drivers
> at once" is an issue, is there any use case at all for having
> multiple balloon drivers active at a time?
> 
> I do not see any.

For example, we had a proposal for a page-cache backed
device. So it could be useful to have two, a regular balloon
and a pagecache backed one.
There could be other uses - it certainly looks like it
works so how can you be sure it's useless?

And even ignoring that, global pointer to a device
is an ugly hack and ugly hacks tend to explode.

And even ignoring estetics, and if we decide we are fine
with a single balloon, it needs to fail gracefully not
crash like it does now.

> -- 
> All rights reversed

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>