From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvm: align ram_size to page boundary
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 14:51:18 +0300
Message-ID: <4FDDC4B6.5030202@redhat.com>
References: <1339922831-23002-1-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com> <4FDDB981.8070309@web.de> <4FDDBFCD.3000608@redhat.com> <4FDDC3C8.5020205@web.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:1535 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1756841Ab2FQMFi (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 17 Jun 2012 08:05:38 -0400
In-Reply-To: <4FDDC3C8.5020205@web.de>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On 06/17/2012 02:47 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>
>>> I think this should rather go into generic code. 
>> 
>> To be honest, I put this in kvm-specific code because vl.c doesn't have
>> TARGET_PAGE_ALIGN.  Maybe we should have machine->page_size or
>> machine->ram_alignment.
>> 
>>> What sense does it make
>>> to have partial pages with TCG?
>> 
>> Why impose an artificial restriction?
> 
> Beca...
> 
>> 
>> (answer: to reduce differences among various accelerators)
>> 
> 
> Oh, you found the answer. :)

Reducing round-trips across the Internet.

> 
> At least, it should be enforce for the x86 target, independent of the
> accelerator.

Yeah.  So there's machine->page_size or machine->ram_alignment.  Not
sure which is best.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function