Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] libxl: xl mem-set should not enforce memory limits

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 05:09:51PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Daniel Kiper writes ("Re: [PATCH 2/2] libxl: xl mem-set should not enforce 
> memory limits"):
> > I think that xl mem-max should be used to enforce limits. If admin
> > would like to enforce "hard" limit it should call xl mem-set and
> > xl mem-max in sequence. If we would like to leave old xl mem-set
> > behavior we should change comment for this command because now
> > it does not mention anythig about limit enforcement. Or we should
> > add an option which explicitly disables memory limit enforment
> > (this behavior is in line with xm mem-set behavior).
> 
> I think this conversation is related to the fact that at Oracle you
> have a different model of the Xen memory allocation model to everyone
> else.

Daniel is trying to fix an bug that Linux kernel is tripping over
b/c of this. Look at the converstation and patch that Daniel posted
a week ago for the Linux kernel.
> 
> Outside Oracle, guests are supposed to aim for the balloon target and
> are not permitted to exceed it (when ballooning up) or to regress
> (when ballooning down).

s/Oracle/Xend/. As Xend had this distinction. 'xm mem-set' would only set
the target. 'xm mem-max' on the other hand would enforce the limit.

Daniel is just bringing this behavior to 'xl'.

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