From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Kd1xz-0001dA-MD
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Sep 2008 08:05:07 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Kd1xx-0001aA-J5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Sep 2008 08:05:06 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=52597 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Kd1xx-0001Zv-BN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Sep 2008 08:05:05 -0400
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4]:37995)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <paul@codesourcery.com>) id 1Kd1xw-0001LP-Vr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 09 Sep 2008 08:05:05 -0400
From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] physical memory allocation?
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 13:04:56 +0100
References: <48C63DBD.8040605@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <48C63DBD.8040605@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200809091304.58624.paul@codesourcery.com>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>

> How about doing that *unconditionally*, not just for kqemu?

Unless you actually need it (qemu doesn't, and kqemu shouldn't) it just slows 
things down, and breaks things when /dev/shm isn't big enough.

Paul