From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andres Lagar-Cavilla <andres@lagarcavilla.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libxenlight: implement
	libxl_set_memory_target
Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:47:17 -0500
Message-ID: <4B200CD5.30807@lagarcavilla.com>
References: <20091208200031.4903B5980EB@homiemail-mx11.g.dreamhost.com>
	<4B1EB743.3090102@lagarcavilla.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.0912091249190.9654@kaball-desktop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0912091249190.9654@kaball-desktop>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>, Vincent Hanquez <Vincent.Hanquez@eu.citrix.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Dec 2009, Andres Lagar-Cavilla wrote:
>   
>> Hi,
>> couple of comments:
>> - PV domains without videoram won't be able to use this
>>     
>
> PV domains just have videoram = 0.
>   
But you abort libxl_set_memory_target if the videoram node is not found. 
Which won't be for PVs with no videoram...
+    videoram_s = libxl_xs_read(ctx, XBT_NULL, libxl_sprintf(ctx, 
"%s/memory/videoram", dompath));
+    if (!videoram_s)
+        return -1;

Andres
>   
>> - Further, doesn't the PV domain build function need to use 
>> target_memkb? (That's my read of what xend does at least)
>>     
>
> Yes, you are right, I'll fix this.
>
>   
>> - Finally, LIBXL_MAXMEM_CONSTANT looks like an "evil constant we should 
>> avoid". Where did it come from?
>>     
>
> I decided to introduce this constant after a discussion with developers
> of the memory management functions in xapi: after thorough testing they
> found that adding 1 MB to maxmem increases the robustness of the system.
>
> BTW the current value of the constant is wrong because it should be
> expressed in KB, I'll send a patch to fix this later today.
>
>