Re: [Xen-devel] (v2) Design proposal for RMRR fix

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 12.01.15 at 12:22, <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>  From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 6:23 PM
>> One of my main problems with all you recent argumentation here
>> is the arbitrary use of the 1Gb boundary - there's nothing special
>> in this discussion with where the boundary is. Everything revolves
>> around the (undue) effect of report-all on domains not needing all
>> of the ranges found on the host.
>> 
> 
> I'm not sure which part of my argument is not clear here. report-all
> would be a problem here only if we want to fix all the conflictions
> (then pulling unnecessary devices increases the confliction possibility) 
> in the domain builder. but if we only fix reasonable ones (e.g. >3GB)
> while warn other conflictions (e.g. <3G) in domain builder (let later 
> assignment path to actually fail if confliction does matter),

And have no way for the user to (securely) avoid that failure. Plus
the definition of "reasonable" here is of course going to be arbitrary.

Jan

> then we 
> don't need to solve all conflictions in domain builder (if say 1G example
> fixing it may instead reduce lowmem greatly) and then report-all 
> may just add more warnings than report-sel for unused devices.
> 
> Thanks
> Kevin




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