Re: [Xen-devel] [OSSTEST Nested PATCH v10 6/9] Changes on test step of Debian hvm guest install

["Pang, LongtaoX" <longtaox.pang@xxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Campbell [mailto:ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 9:56 PM
> To: Pang, LongtaoX
> Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx; 
> Hu,
> Robert
> Subject: Re: [OSSTEST Nested PATCH v10 6/9] Changes on test step of Debian hvm
> guest install
> 
> On Wed, 2015-05-13 at 11:36 +0800, longtao.pang wrote:
> > @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ d-i partman-auto/expert_recipe string \\
> >                          use_filesystem{ } filesystem{ vfat } \\
> >                          mountpoint{ /boot/efi } \\
> >                  . \\
> > -                5000 50 5000 ext4 \\
> > +                10000 50 10000 ext4 \\
> 
> These three numbers are
> 
> <limits>::=<minimal size>_<priority>_<maximal size>_<parted fs>
> 
> (from
> http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/d-i/debian-installer.git/tree/doc/devel/partman-a
> uto-recipe.txt)
> 
> So here you are increasing the minimum size of the root partition for
> all debianhvm domains (including non-nested ones and L2 guests) from 5G
> to 10G.
> 
> Did you test this with a normal L1 debianhvm guest (not one destined to
> be an L1 host). i.e. using test-amd64-amd64-xl-qemuu-debianhvm-amd64 ?
> 
> The new size you have given is the same size as the entire disk in that
> case. I'm not sure what will then happen...
> 
> Perhaps "5000 50 -1 ext4" does what you need, namely leaves the minimum
> alone and sets the maximum to unlimited, which I think will end up
> making this partition as big as the disk less the configured swap space.
> 
> Ian.
I have ever used 'Debian-7.6.0-amd64-DVD-1.iso' as debianhvm_image which is 
3.7G. 
At that time, it's necessary to extend L1 guest's rootf size to '10000' to 
store the image.
Currently, I use 'Debian-7.2.0-amd64-CD-1.iso' as debianhvm_image which is just 
624M,
the origin rootfs size of '5000' is sufficient to store this image and I have 
tried that it works fine for nested job.
So, it's no need to extend guest's rootfs size anymore.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel