From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: freemem-slack and large memory environments Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:57:54 +0000 Message-ID: <1424966274.14641.89.camel@citrix.com> References: <4321015.nah3j6dvJq@mlatimer1.dnsdhcp.provo.novell.com> <1424872993.20243.117.camel@citrix.com> <2100847.1PzneRuFSU@mlatimer1.dnsdhcp.provo.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <2100847.1PzneRuFSU@mlatimer1.dnsdhcp.provo.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Mike Latimer Cc: wei.liu2@citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com, Stefano Stabellini List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 08:36 -0700, Mike Latimer wrote: > On Wednesday, February 25, 2015 02:09:50 PM Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > Is the upshot that Mike doesn't need to do anything further with his > > > patch (i.e. can drop it)? I think so? > > > > Yes, I think so. Maybe he could help out testing the patches I am going > > to write :-) > > Sorry for not responding to this yesterday. > > There is still one aspect of my original patch that is important. As the code > currently stands, the target for dom0 is set lower during each iteration of > the loop. Unless only one iteration is required, dom0 will end up being set to > a much lower target than is actually required. Is this because some sort of slack is applied once per iteration rather than once at the start or is it something else? > > There are two ways to fix this issue: > > - Set the memory target for dom0 once, before entering the loop > - During each iteration of the loop, compare the amount of needed memory to > the amount of memory which will be available once dom0 hits the target, and > only lower the target if additional memory is needed. > > My patch earlier in this thread does the former, but I think the second option > is also possible. Is there a preference between those approaches (or a better > idea)? > > Thanks, > Mike > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xen.org > http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel