Re: freemem-slack and large memory environments

[Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>]

On Tue, 3 Mar 2015, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-03-02 at 15:49 -0700, Mike Latimer wrote:
> > On Monday, March 02, 2015 04:15:41 PM Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2 Mar 2015, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > > ? "Continue as long as progress is being made" is exactly what
> > > > 2563bca1154 "libxl: Wait for ballooning if free memory is increasing"
> > > > was trying to implement, so it certainly was the idea behind the current
> > > > implementation (it may well not have managed to implement the idea it
> > > > was trying to).
> > > 
> > > I don't think so: pre-2563bca1154 it wasn't and 2563bca1154 doesn't
> > > implement it properly.  I think we should revert it.
> > 
> > I agree. The intent was there, but we are not aware of any known problem cases 
> > that the changes will effect. Reverting seems like the right thing to do.
> > 
> > > I agree with the suggestion "continue as long as progress is being
> > > made". I disagree that "continue as long as progress is being made" is
> > > the current logic of freemem.
> > > 
> > > I don't have an opinion on whether that logic should be implemented in
> > > freemem or libxl_wait_for_memory_target. The code below implements it in
> > > libxl_wait_for_memory_target.
> > 
> > Seems like it should wait in libxl_wait_for_memory_target, as you have 
> > implemented.
> 
> Please can someone submit a series with the revert and the change to
> libxl_wait_for_memory_tareget in which ever order makes sense.

I'll do