From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34906) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gD9I3-0003oY-2S for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 10:28:43 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gD9Hz-0003Rt-OX for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 10:28:42 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f54.google.com ([209.85.221.54]:33479) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gD9Hz-0003J9-D1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 10:28:39 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f54.google.com with SMTP id e4-v6so33941761wrs.0 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 07:28:30 -0700 (PDT) References: <87efcqniza.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> <20181016132035.GF7995@redhat.com> <87o9brl7zc.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 16:28:27 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87o9brl7zc.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] When it's okay to treat OOM as fatal? List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Markus Armbruster , =?UTF-8?Q?Daniel_P=2e_Berrang=c3=a9?= Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 18/10/2018 15:06, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Device "qxl" creates a memory region "qxl.vgavram" with a size taken > from uint32_t property "ram_size", silently rounded up to the next power > of two. It uses &error_fatal for error handling. That's good to some extent---it means that the core code _is_ ready for handling ENOMEM in this part of QEMU, it's just the device that doesn't use it. Paolo