From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48645) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gVG0e-0005AI-QM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 07 Dec 2018 08:17:37 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gVG0Z-00067q-Ru for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 07 Dec 2018 08:17:36 -0500 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2018 14:17:20 +0100 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20181207141720.2264b06f.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20181207135253.10e3e021@oc2783563651> References: <20181205145131.28467-1-cohuck@redhat.com> <5d274f2c-23a2-0c4f-9f2d-07cbe529c5ac@de.ibm.com> <20181207132946.00df1f5a.cohuck@redhat.com> <20181207135253.10e3e021@oc2783563651> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] vfio-ap: flag as compatible with balloon List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Halil Pasic Cc: Christian Borntraeger , Tony Krowiak , Pierre Morel , David Hildenbrand , qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Alex Williamson On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 13:52:53 +0100 Halil Pasic wrote: > On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 13:29:46 +0100 > Cornelia Huck wrote: > > > On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 13:17:02 +0100 > > Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > > > > On 05.12.2018 15:51, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > > > vfio-ap devices do not pin any pages in the host. Therefore, they > > > > are belived to be compatible with memory ballooning. > > > > > > > > Flag them as compatible, so both vfio-ap and a balloon can be > > > > used simultaneously. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck > > With the comment stuff sorted out: > Reviewed-by: Halil Pasic So, do you agree with the comment change I suggested? + /* + * vfio-ap devices operate in a way compatible with + * memory ballooning, as no pages are pinned in the host. + * This needs to be set before vfio_get_device() for vfio common to + * handle the balloon inhibitor. + */ > > @Connie: Just had a look at the MAINTAINERS file and hw/vfio/ap.c > is listed under Arch. support S90 with you as a maintainer, and under > vfio-ap with 4 maintainers listed one of them being me. The question > is who is going to post a PULL request for this? General practice has been that I'm collecting everything s390x related. I have also pulled from others before (e.g. some bios changes from Thomas). While you could apply the patch, send it to me, and then I'd queue it to s390-next, I can also simply queue it directly with your ack :) [Longer term, if you want to collect ap patches and then send me a pull request, I would also be happy to do that. For this single patch, it seems overkill.] > > > > > > > Does it make sense to add cc stable for 3.1? > > > > Can do that, given that s390x systems really rely on the ballooner in > > general. > > > > I agree with cc stable. Will add when applying.