From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757141Ab1JOAop (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Oct 2011 20:44:45 -0400 Received: from rcsinet15.oracle.com ([148.87.113.117]:23888 "EHLO rcsinet15.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754395Ab1JOAoo (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Oct 2011 20:44:44 -0400 Message-ID: <4E98D739.4000705@oracle.com> Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 17:43:37 -0700 From: Maxim Uvarov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.21) Gecko/20110831 Thunderbird/3.1.13 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge CC: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, konrad.wilk@oracle.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] XEN_DOMAIN_MEMORY options. References: <1318631811-21559-1-git-send-email-maxim.uvarov@oracle.com> <4E98BEF5.10801@goop.org> <4E98C6CE.4020508@oracle.com> <4E98C8B1.20304@goop.org> In-Reply-To: <4E98C8B1.20304@goop.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Source-IP: ucsinet24.oracle.com [156.151.31.67] X-CT-RefId: str=0001.0A090201.4E98D778.012C,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/14/2011 04:41 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > On 10/14/2011 04:33 PM, Maxim Uvarov wrote: >> On 10/14/2011 04:00 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: >>> On 10/14/2011 03:36 PM, Maxim Uvarov wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Please find here patches for XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY: >>>> >>>> [PATCH 1/2] xen: Fix XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY to be selectable >>>> [PATCH 2/2] xen: Make XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY have more sensible >>>> defaults for 32-bit builds >>> >>> What's the rationale? >>> >>> J >> >> The first patch is actually bug fix. You can not define just "int" >> without description in Kconfig. As the result this option will not be >> visible in menuconfig. Even if you will change it in .config make >> oldconfig will set it up for default value. So you need to add any >> description to it as all others int options have. > > No, that was deliberate, because I don't really think there's a need to > change it. > From that point of view it's not clear why this option is still in Kconfig? Jeremy, can you please share more details about this? I see people are having troubles with this option and in different kernels I see different work arounds for it. For example: http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2011-01/msg01841.html Maxim. >> >> Second patch is more optional and it's just suggestion to use for 32 >> bit more corresponding value. > > While it would be very silly to put 128GB of actual RAM on a 32-bit > machine, systems can have non-contiguous RAM placed at high addresses, > which would no longer be accessible. > > J