On Mon, 2021-03-08 at 10:52 +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 08:14:02PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > +# If enabled, libvirt will not attempt to change process limits (as > > +# configured with the max_processes, max_files and max_core settings > > +# below) itself but will instead expect an external entity to perform > > +# this task. > > Can't users simply not set max_core, max_files, etc already ? That works for things that are static and have a corresponding configuration option in qemu.conf, but the memory locking limit is dynamic, per-VM and needs to change as devices are added and removed from the guest. > I think it is preferrable to have flags tailored specifically to > the individual limits, not a global flag. Otherwise you can end > up in a case where you want to disable the memory limits, but > keep the other limits set which is impossible with this global > flag. Since what I'm interested in is the memory locking limit, I guess I could turn this into max_memlock_external = 1 or even max_memlock = "external" with "dynamic" being the other accepted value, which would be the default and would behave as libvirt does today. Do you think that would work better? -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
