From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: George Dunlap Subject: Re: Proposed new "memory capacity claim" hypercall/feature Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 17:14:17 +0000 Message-ID: <5097F3E9.1060404@eu.citrix.com> References: <60d00f38-98a3-4ec2-acbd-b49dafaada56@default> <20121029223555.GA24388@ocelot.phlegethon.org> <508F9DE902000078000A5565@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Dan Magenheimer Cc: "Tim (Xen.org)" , Olaf Hering , "Keir (Xen.org)" , Ian Campbell , Konrad Wilk , Ian Jackson , George Shuklin , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" , DarioFaggioli , Jan Beulich , Kurt Hackel , Zhigang Wang List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 30/10/12 15:43, Dan Magenheimer wrote: > a) Truly free memory (each free page is on the hypervisor free list) > b) Freeable memory ("ephmeral" memory managed by tmem) > c) Owned memory (pages allocated by the hypervisor or for a domain) > > The sum of these three is always a constant: The total number of > RAM pages in the system. However, when tmem is active, the values > of all _three_ of these change constantly. So if at the start of a > domain launch, the sum of free+freeable exceeds the intended size > of the domain, the domain allocation/launch can start. Why free+freeable, rather than just "free"? > But then > if "owned" increases enough, there may no longer be enough memory > and the domain launch will fail. Again, "owned" would not increase at all if the guest weren't handing memory back to Xen. Why is that necessary, or even helpful? (And please don't start another rant about the bold new world of peace and love. Give me a freaking *technical* answer.) -George