On 11/20/2020 6:08 PM, Martin Kletzander wrote:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 01:17:29PM +0800, Zhong, Luyao wrote:
On 11/18/2020 8:42 PM, Martin Kletzander wrote:
So let's finish this sooner rather than later. Let's remove the
"migratable/movable" attribute and add another mode for the way memory
allocations are going to be treated. But let's name it something
else than
"default" and let's explain the name properly in man pages and
documentation.
Since naming is hard and names I come up with are usually bad I can only
suggest
a lowest bottom fallback if we can't come up with anything else =) Let's
say
something like "restrictive".
I have no better name than yours. So "restrictive" is good I think, I
could use it and send out the patch first, then other reviewers might
come up with new name otherwise we keep it.
I actually thought of another way yesterday. What if not specifying any
mode,
but specifying nodeset means we'll use cpuset.mems, but don't tell
QEMU? That
sounds to me like something that could make sense for both of us and
could be
easily explainable in the documentation to your users.
"not specifying any mode" will be treated as and formatted to "strict"
mode in libvirt since the enumeration type is initialed to the first
value: "strict".[1]
[1]https://github.com/libvirt/libvirt/blob/master/include/libvirt/libvirt-domain.h#L2845
And I need a place(a variable with new value) to hold my config, right?
Otherwise in libvirt what value can indicates this config? That's one of
the reasons why I have to introduce a new option for mode.
Basically just like your patch, but "no mode" means "default mode" and
without
any "migratable" or anything. We might need to figure out how to deal with
virsh parameters, but that should be easy to do.
Thanks for your patience ;)
