On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 04:24:57PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Mon, 2017-03-27 at 15:42 +0200, Martin Kletzander wrote:> > Are you planning on adding new element to the > > domain XML which would allow setting this number as well? > > I do. Unless I forget about it again, of course :) Well, honestly, then I feel really bad about forcing people do different choices and changing it between releases. I don't think anyone wants to be checking all documentation changes every release. But since there are only two releases with the patch being in, it's probably okay. But I would *at least* be nice to mention that the lock limit is on it's way to the XML.I'm not going to advertise a feature before it has materialized: this is not Hollywoo, we don't need to get people hyped using teasers and trailers ;) Moreover, I'm actually starting to question the utility of such a feature altogether. If you're using <memoryBacking><locked>, all the memory allocated by QEMU is going to be locked, so there's no point in setting the memory locking limit to anything but <memtune><hard_limit>.
Since we can only lock the whole memory, then it makes sense.
For all other cases our calculations should be correct, and if it turns out that they aren't we want people to get back to us and let us know so we can fix it for everybody rather than work around the bug using the new setting. -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
