From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: freemem-slack and large memory environments Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 12:00:59 +0000 Message-ID: <1424865659.20243.83.camel@citrix.com> References: <4321015.nah3j6dvJq@mlatimer1.dnsdhcp.provo.novell.com> <2094469.vaaEIflRW2@mlatimer1.dnsdhcp.provo.novell.com> <1424268653.27775.68.camel@citrix.com> <1424796841.20243.5.camel@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Stefano Stabellini Cc: wei.liu2@citrix.com, ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com, Mike Latimer , xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Wed, 2015-02-25 at 11:39 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Tue, 24 Feb 2015, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 16:06 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > > Now that we autodetect the use of dom0_mem and set autoballooning > > > > correctly perhaps we should just revert a39b5bc64? > > > > > > We could do that and theoretically it makes perfect sense, but it would > > > result in an even bigger waste of memory. > > > > Would it, even though we now detect dom0_mem usage and do the right > > thing? I thought a39b5bc64 was a workaround for autoballooning=1 > > in /etc/xen/xl.conf when dom0 was used. > > > > > > > I think we should either introduce an hard upper limit for > > > freemem-slack as Mike suggested, or remove freemem-slack altogether and > > > properly fix any issues caused by lack of memory in the system (properly > > > account memory usage). > > > After all we are just at the beginning of the release cycle, it is the > > > right time to do this. > > > > I'm all in favour of someone doing this, similarly to > > http://bugs.xenproject.org/xen/bug/23 > > > > Who is going to do that (either one)? > > I am OK with sending the patch for both Super, thanks.