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

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 18.01.15 at 09:36, <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>  From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 6:06 PM
>> 
>> > The composed reserved region list is then passed to domain builder,
>> > which tries to detect and avoid conflicts when populating guest RAM.
>> > To avoid breaking lowmem/highmem layout, we can define a
>> > lowmem_guard so if making hole for a region would make lowmem_top
>> > below lowmem_guard we'll treat this region as a conflict. We may
>> > either just hardcode the value like 2G (or other reasonable value in your
>> > mind), or allow user to config e.g.:
>> >    rmrr = [ 'host, check=force/try', 'lowmem_boundary=2G' ]
>> 
>> To me it looks like lowmem_boundary makes sense only when
>> check=try.
> 
> yes it only makes sense when check=try but the setting should be global
> i.e. we don't want to have it configured per-device, right? do you have
> a thought on a better option here?

No, I think the naming is acceptable. I really just wanted to point
out that the example line you gave wasn't fully consistent.

Jan


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