[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 for-4.5] libxl: account for romfile memory
On 11/26/14 09:40, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 01:04:00PM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 12:39 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:On Wed, 26 Nov 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:Given that this is not a regression, we could wait for 4.6 to commit theOn Tue, 2014-11-25 at 17:05 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:On Tue, 25 Nov 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:On Tue, 2014-11-25 at 16:49 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:On Tue, 25 Nov 2014, Ian Campbell wrote:On Tue, 2014-11-25 at 12:43 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:Account for the extra memory needed for the rom files of any emulated nics: QEMU uses xc_domain_populate_physmap_exact to allocate the memory for each them. Assume 256K each.I suppose this will have to do for 4.5. Can we do something better in the future -- like figuring out a way for guests to have "not-really-RAM" allocations like this which are made by the toolstack and happen to be backed by RAM not count or something.This patch fixes a QEMU abort() when more than 4 emulated nics are assigned to a VM.Are you also going to fix qemu to fail gracefully if it cannot deploy option roms? abort() seems a bit extreme.Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> CC: Don Slutz <dslutz@xxxxxxxxxxx> CC: hanyandong <hanyandong@xxxxxxxxx> CC: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> CC: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> CC: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>You missed Ian J. I've added him.Actually Wei suggested a better alternative: I could call xc_domain_setmaxmem directly from QEMU. That makes much more sense.xl mem-set would do it again, but not taking qemu's extras into account, unless you communicate the overhead somehow...We could start reading the current maxmem and add to it in libxl_set_memory_target. Or we could write the maxmem to xenstore and read it back again. Given that the allocations are only done by QEMU at initialization time, I don't think we need to worry about concurrency here.Might work, but it's a bit scary for 4.5, I would expect there to be subtle knock on effects from this sort of thing :-/fix and then if it doesn't cause any unwanted side effects, we could backport it?That's not a bad plan. Release noting "you can't create more than 4 emulated NICs" doesn't seem so bad to me. The Release note needs to include that e1000 & rtl8139 have this restriction. vmxnet3 does not (and cannot be used for PXE boot). -Don Slutz <wipes out the sweat from his forehead> 4.6 it is then!Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |