This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


RE: [Xen-devel] RE: Ballooning up

> From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge [mailto:jeremy@xxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 11:29 AM
> To: Ian Campbell
> Cc: Dan Magenheimer; Stefano Stabellini; Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> Daniel Kiper; Konrad Wilk
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] RE: Ballooning up
>  On 09/15/2010 12:10 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >> Indeed.  I think adding general 32x limit between base and max size
> will
> >> prevent a completely unusable system, and then just suggest using
> mem=
> >> to control that more precisely (esp for dom0).
> > Sounds reasonable.
> I found 32x doesn't work; there seems to be a lot more per-page
> overhead
> than I expected.  I made the limit 10x, which I determined empirically
> and somewhat arbitrarily, but it does seem reasonable.

Any idea what amount/percent of memory is "wasted" with this limit?
(e.g. assuming a system with 10GB physical memory and dom0_mem=1G
and no up-ballooning)

So if one knows a priori that dom0 will not be ballooned up
above dom0_mem, one specifies dom0_mem= on the xen boot line
and mem= on the dom0 "module" line?

IIRC the Linux mem=1G option doesn't really limit physical
memory to 1G, just specifies the highest legal address, ignoring
holes.  Dunno if dom0_mem has this problem (on xenolinux)
but I think it does not.

Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>