From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keith Coleman Subject: Re: Re: PoD issue Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 19:03:20 -0500 Message-ID: <5411dbdc1002181603t23f3a4f6xf28bc0c92403448d@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B65C25E02000078000584AB@vpn.id2.novell.com> <4B69C381.10005@eu.citrix.com> <4B6A90B1020000780002DA3B@vpn.id2.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: George Dunlap Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Keir Fraser , Jan Beulich List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 2:12 PM, George Dunlap wrote: > Yeah, the OSS tree doesn't get the kind of regression testing it > really needs at the moment. =A0I was using the OSS balloon drivers when > I implemented and submitted the PoD code last year. =A0I didn't have any > trouble then, and I was definitely using up all of the memory. =A0But I > haven't done any testing on OSS since then, basically. > Is it expected that booting HVM guests with maxmem > memory is unstable? In testing 3.4.3-rc2 (kernel 2.6.18 c/s 993) I can easily crash the guest and occasionally the entire server. Keith Coleman