From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andres Lagar-Cavilla Subject: Re: [PATCH] libxenlight: implement libxl_set_memory_target Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 10:10:52 -0500 Message-ID: <4B210F7C.3000007@lagarcavilla.com> References: <20091208200031.4903B5980EB@homiemail-mx11.g.dreamhost.com> <4B1EB743.3090102@lagarcavilla.com> <4B200CD5.30807@lagarcavilla.com> <4B20FF3C.8090501@lagarcavilla.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: 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: Stefano Stabellini Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Oh, I'm working with an old changeset. Yikes. Thanks, Andres Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, Andres Lagar-Cavilla wrote: > >> Errrr, no. >> http://xenbits.xen.org/xen-unstable.hg?file/8f304c003af4/tools/libxl/libxl.c >> shows that the videoram node will be set only if we are using a >> device-model. And specifically if we are in fully virtualized mode, i.e. >> dm_info->type == XENFV, i.e. *not* PV >> > > I understand that this can be confusing, but at the moment we have two > videoram parameters: dm_info->videoram is for the device model while > b_info->video_memkb is for domain building. > If you look at init_dm_info, you'll see that dm_info->videoram is set > from b_info->video_memkb. > Also if you read libxl_dom.c:build_post you'll see that no matter if the > guest is a pv or an hvm domain, memory/videoram will be written to > xenstore anyway. > >