From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02456C5B552 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 12:52:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.1010751.1388928 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1uOyT0-0000ud-Vt; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 12:52:38 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 1010751.1388928; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 12:52:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1uOyT0-0000uW-T4; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 12:52:38 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 1010751; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 12:52:38 +0000 Received: from se1-gles-sth1-in.inumbo.com ([159.253.27.254] helo=se1-gles-sth1.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1uOyT0-0000uQ-3h for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 12:52:38 +0000 Received: from mail-wm1-x32d.google.com (mail-wm1-x32d.google.com [2a00:1450:4864:20::32d]) by se1-gles-sth1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id c8f6e0eb-45f9-11f0-a306-13f23c93f187; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 14:52:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4530921461aso20679305e9.0 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 05:52:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (112.pool92-178-7.dynamic.orange.es. [92.178.7.112]) by smtp.gmail.com with UTF8SMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-45209ce5045sm140054855e9.16.2025.06.10.05.52.35 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 10 Jun 2025 05:52:35 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" X-Inumbo-ID: c8f6e0eb-45f9-11f0-a306-13f23c93f187 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=citrix.com; s=google; t=1749559956; x=1750164756; darn=lists.xenproject.org; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=QNwNGuZDjfSKW+hJnEnicX5F+61CXU5mF5s0DDQPyEo=; b=A0nwNhyHPM0/deqGnyBWXqFhvsBIC5pPh5e8VBQrNi5loKm6HUZSQW/9He6itOkcvH vnKna4rODjUI8czAUdoos8eD3t2V7GiRoU6LriTH7f18WHepE+l5mynj/TnfJEWGKABW JRXLRK93W6AnmexqXgN5zI3jp92dBv19Q1jxg= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1749559956; x=1750164756; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=QNwNGuZDjfSKW+hJnEnicX5F+61CXU5mF5s0DDQPyEo=; b=QwJcpKVwvZxjKhC0ZB6quDwht0fAZqOmf+qyy3Mf/d4PoYdlrBcmh7rLzNMIMot+h1 MaFxqvBn5Ok4gVncnUIZ3Y69foNO1P/ow1gYkRpMq4hSK/W2NeKC4Zao4IM8rBoVDyh8 dStwPs2AEEQxCWK+mdZclN34OCWVra1HufGlzd5Vi7zaK2CfmHYGg2G76e1lE/6n6B4L Yk52a0Mv2Orah1kXzEmPwwtb82xWWb5Q8dlUo3zo119fVIAR6ns+8F20TLtMMyniOeSq NIdVWX2FPPNOOcO2KlIHSFjZEZzTimUUbc6p/Gw0a+4vs8OEWSOdEeFPNfI/+gki5gtj ZSiA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVmWxq7Ffpajc2g20XkUbjMUTZeR3mUNTlHBfnpPLZurBoSi/qXBHEStZlvwwr1uCY8SX4fJ9h9L2c=@lists.xenproject.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yw9RpeC6n/j7ND1vlz4lVyVSLGFmddnaJlCfotpVfs+lsssk+vO KkTFCoNZUtQef1ewCx0+iF7zpZc2lmTTsVNd8p/SXyfh74HNWIBVJb0X6r/eAuMxSMc= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuM8zrf9m0WmlewLAOpS/0LnGhaX+fXnbaeD4LEV/aJjaDM6eS6d0B3VGYGHeR gYgasymz8Y18+h4v+lMNh0FcxXNIs2X0gJhgNjF1fvqERUtshc+JiWVe0GThR+4XeS8MRNNjLZp ZeebBG4R9P6hl7bW9O6xZ4nCIQOMO1jSB8aqCePEzS91wEcCiAOvZGhCS23ytsRqE0EmKYk8Sey WkhrJSUUPR//duhF5LHdteK0ahLkzsJMdgJyLqTpyWzZ/9KYe3ljJxKGD07kqNI2jhJKa/JDMXD qwQ+CEhODbJ0kqg0+i1t+b4znO9E1evEv9dL/AG4Njt1FR3lN5N8MZz8DkHljUr7EtieIAWsWO1 npoDomcNLT4sN6oP6KciN6FbjPIzXMTzm0rI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGmy475I5ChoYkxK9sPKY1SL97jwihsfcdPWwI+lLhob3jS+PnFAN3hOM1t999T6d3ccfW8DQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3d94:b0:43c:fe90:1282 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-45201417fccmr141387435e9.7.1749559956263; Tue, 10 Jun 2025 05:52:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 14:52:34 +0200 From: Roger Pau =?utf-8?B?TW9ubsOp?= To: Jan Beulich Cc: Alejandro Vallejo , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Bernhard Kaindl , Andrew Cooper , Anthony PERARD , Michal Orzel , Julien Grall , Stefano Stabellini Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/11] xen/page_alloc: Remove `claim` from domain_set_outstanding_pages() Message-ID: References: <20250314172502.53498-1-alejandro.vallejo@cloud.com> <20250314172502.53498-3-alejandro.vallejo@cloud.com> <89d4250e-20aa-4515-8199-7003afb0bcbf@suse.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <89d4250e-20aa-4515-8199-7003afb0bcbf@suse.com> On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 02:23:26PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 05.06.2025 18:42, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 05:24:53PM +0000, Alejandro Vallejo wrote: > >> With a single global count for the claims it's easy to substract > >> domain_tot_pages() from the claim so the number given in the hypercall > >> is the real reservation of the domain. This is the current behaviour. > >> > >> However, a later patch introduces exact-node claims and those interact > >> very poorly with such a scheme. Since accounting domain_tot_pages() in > >> one case but not the other seems strictly worse than not accounting them > >> at all (which is at least consistent), this patch stops substracting > >> tot_pages from the claim and instead checks that claimed memory + > >> allocated memory don't exceed max_mem. > > > > Hm, while I don't have any specific interest in keeping the current > > behavior, XENMEM_claim_pages is part of the stable ABI (it's not a > > domctl), and hence should be stable. > > Is that true? It sits inside a > > #if defined(__XEN__) || defined(__XEN_TOOLS__) > > which generally de-marks unstable (tools-only) interfaces. Ops, my bad, I didn't realize it was inside such region. > > Note also the comment above the > > definition of XENMEM_claim_pages how it states the specific behavior > > that you are trying to change (and which should have been adjusted as > > part of this change). > > This is the more important part, imo. I see. Well, it's in a kind of a weird position then, because there's no equivalent of XEN_DOMCTL_INTERFACE_VERSION that we could use to signal callers of the changed interface, like we do for domctl. Thanks, Roger.