From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
Subject: Re: Proposed new "memory capacity claim"
	hypercall/feature
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 10:57:33 +0000
Message-ID: <CCC1409D.51B70%keir@xen.org>
References: <20635.34133.118531.778138@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <20635.34133.118531.778138@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: "Tim (Xen.org)" <tim@xen.org>, Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>, Kurt Hackel <kurt.hackel@oracle.com>, George Shuklin <george.shuklin@gmail.com>, Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, DarioFaggioli <raistlin@linux.it>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, Zhigang Wang <zhigang.x.wang@oracle.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 08/11/2012 10:11, "Ian Jackson" <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:

> Keir Fraser writes ("Re: Proposed new "memory capacity claim"
> hypercall/feature"):
>> On 07/11/2012 22:17, "Dan Magenheimer" <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com> wrote:
>>> I think this brings us back to the proposed "claim" hypercall/subop.
>>> Unless there are further objections or suggestions for different
>>> approaches, I'll commence prototyping it, OK?
>> 
>> Yes, in fact I thought you'd started already!
> 
> Sorry to play bad cop here but I am still far from convinced that a
> new hypercall is necessary or desirable.
> 
> A lot of words have been written but the concrete, detailed, technical
> argument remains to be made IMO.

I agree but prototyping != acceptance, and at least it gives something
concrete to hang the discussion on. Otherwise this longwinded thread is
going nowhere.

> Ian.