Re: [Xen-devel] [v4][PATCH 12/19] tools/libxl: passes rdm reservation policy

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Tiejun Chen writes ("[v4][PATCH 12/19] tools/libxl: passes rdm reservation 
policy"):
> This patch passes our rdm reservation policy inside libxl
> when we assign a device or attach a device.
...
> diff --git a/docs/man/xl.pod.1 b/docs/man/xl.pod.1
> index 4eb929d..c5c4809 100644
> --- a/docs/man/xl.pod.1
> +++ b/docs/man/xl.pod.1
> @@ -1368,10 +1368,15 @@ it will also attempt to re-bind the device to its 
> original driver, making it
>  usable by Domain 0 again.  If the device is not bound to pciback, it will
>  return success.
>  
> -=item B<pci-attach> I<domain-id> I<BDF>
> +=item B<pci-attach> I<domain-id> I<BDF> [I<rdm>]
>  
>  Hot-plug a new pass-through pci device to the specified domain.
>  B<BDF> is the PCI Bus/Device/Function of the physical device to pass-through.
> +B<rdm policy> is about how to handle conflict between reserving reserved 
> device
> +memory and guest address space. "strict" means an unsolved conflict leads to
> +immediate VM crash, while "relaxed" allows VM moving forward with a warning
> +message thrown out. Here "strict" is default.

Surely it would be better to reject the attach attempt rather than
crashing the domain.

Also, again, this text is not really user-focused.  It needs to
explain what the risks of using `relaxed' are (or what other checks or
countermeasures the admin should use before setting `relaxed').

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel