[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 1/2] viridian: remove implicit limit of 64 VPs per partition

On 11/01/2021 09:16, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 11.01.2021 10:12, Paul Durrant wrote:
>>> From: Paul Durrant <xadimgnik@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Sent: 11 January 2021 09:10
>>>> From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>>>> Sent: 11 January 2021 09:00
>>>> On 11.01.2021 09:45, Paul Durrant wrote:
>>>>> You can add my R-b to the patch.
>>>> That's the unchanged patch then, including the libxl change that
>>>> I had asked about and that I have to admit I don't fully follow
>>>> Igor's responses? I'm hesitant to give an ack for that aspect of
>>>> the change, yet I suppose the libxl maintainers will defer to
>>>> x86 ones there. Alternatively Andrew or Roger could of course
>>>> ack this ...
>>> I don't think we really need specific control in xl.cfg as this is a fix 
>>> for some poorly documented
>>> semantics in the spec. The flag simply prevents the leaf magically 
>>> appearing on migrate and I think
>>> that's enough.
>> ... although adding an option in xl/libxl isn't that much work, I suppose.
>> Igor, would you be ok plumbing it through?
> This back and forth leaves unclear to me what I should do. I
> would have asked on irc, but you're not there as it seems.

I don't see a scenario where somebody would want to opt out of unlimited
VPs per domain given the leaf with -1 is supported on all Windows versions.
I can make it configurable in the future if reports re-surface it causes
troubles somewhere.

I'd like to do the same with CPU hotplug bit (given it's not configurable
in QEMU either) but wanted to hear an opinion here?




Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.