Re: [Xen-devel] [v5][PATCH 10/16] tools: introduce some new parameters to set rdm policy

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 2015-07-08 at 08:54 +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
> >> +"none" is the default value and it means we don't check any reserved 
> >> regions
> >> +and then all rdm policies would be ignored. Guest just works as before and
> >> +the conflict of RDM and guest address space wouldn't be handled, and then
> >> +this may result in the associated device not being able to work or even 
> >> crash
> >> +the VM. So if you're assigning this kind of device, this option is not
> >> +recommended unless you can make sure any conflict doesn't exist.
> >> +
> >
> > One issue didn't come to conclusion during last round of review. Ian was
> > asking what's the difference with type=none vs not specifying rdm option
> > at all.
> >
> > You need to either convince Ian or remove "type=none" in *xl* level.
> > I.e. don't touch the libxl IDL. It still needs a none type.
> 
> I'll update this next revision. And also rephrase this doc to address 
> your comments below.

FTR I think I indicated yesterday that I was satisfied with your
explanation for why type=none exists as an option even at the xl level,
namely that it allows us to change the default in the future.

Ian.


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