From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: Re: [kvm] Re: [kvm] Re: Questions about duplicate memory work Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 14:22:43 -0300 Message-ID: <20110929172243.GA7202@amt.cnet> References: <20110926071803.GE18099@stodi.digitalkingdom.org> <20110927073842.GY18099@stodi.digitalkingdom.org> <20110927084843.GB28218@stodi.digitalkingdom.org> <20110927090000.GC28218@stodi.digitalkingdom.org> <4E819C29.9040000@redhat.com> <20110929001105.GG11528@stodi.digitalkingdom.org> <20110929001447.GI11528@stodi.digitalkingdom.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Avi Kivity , Emmanuel Noobadmin , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Andrea Arcangeli To: Robin Lee Powell Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:9193 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756890Ab1I2Rmv (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:42:51 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110929001447.GI11528@stodi.digitalkingdom.org> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 05:14:47PM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > > Please post the contents of /proc/meminfo and /proc/zoneinfo when > > > this is happening. > > > > I just noticed that the amount of RAM the VMs had in VIRT added up > > to considerably more than the host's actual RAM; hard_limit is now > > on. So I may not be able to replicate this. :) > > Or not; even with hard_limit the VIRT value goes to hundreds of MiB > more than the limit. Is that expected? Yes, VIRT field refers to total memory mapped by the process, not paged-in memory, which is indicated by the RES field.