RE: [PATCH V2 0/6] populate/unpopulate memory when domain on static

[Penny Zheng <Penny.Zheng@arm.com>]

Hi jan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2022 4:47 PM
> To: Penny Zheng <Penny.Zheng@arm.com>
> Cc: Wei Chen <Wei.Chen@arm.com>; Andrew Cooper
> <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>; George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com>;
> Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>; Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>; Wei
> Liu <wl@xen.org>; Bertrand Marquis <Bertrand.Marquis@arm.com>;
> Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@epam.com>; xen-
> devel@lists.xenproject.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/6] populate/unpopulate memory when domain on
> static
> 
> On 18.04.2022 14:22, Penny Zheng wrote:
> > Today when a domain unpopulates the memory on runtime, they will
> > always hand the memory over to the heap allocator. And it will be a
> > problem if it is a static domain. Pages as guest RAM for static domain
> > shall always be reserved to only this domain and not be used for any
> > other purposes, so they shall never go back to heap allocator.
> >
> > This patch serie intends to fix this issue, by adding pages on the new
> > list resv_page_list after having taken them off the "normal" list,
> > when unpopulating memory, and retrieving pages from resv page
> > list(resv_page_list) when populating memory.
> >
> > ---
> > v2 changes:
> > - let "flags" live in the struct domain. So other arch can take
> > advantage of it in the future
> > - change name from "is_domain_on_static_allocation" to
> "is_domain_static()"
> 
> I have reservations against this new name: This could mean far more aspects of
> the domain are static than just its memory assignment. Was this intended (or
> at least considered)?
> 

Ok. Julien gave me two suggestions back the day, maybe the other "is_domain_using_staticmem()"
is better and to the point. I'll change it in the next serie.

> Jan