On 01/07/2011 12:09 AM, Nikunj A. Dadhania wrote:
> From: Nikunj A. Dadhania <nikunj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Display unlimited when the memory cgroup settings says so. Unlimited is
> represented by INT64_MAX in memory cgroup.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nikunj A. Dadhania <nikunj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reported-by: Justin Clift <jclift@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> tools/virsh.c | 10 ++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/virsh.c b/tools/virsh.c
> index 55e2a68..bee875c 100644
> --- a/tools/virsh.c
> +++ b/tools/virsh.c
> @@ -2987,9 +2987,15 @@ cmdMemtune(vshControl * ctl, const vshCmd * cmd)
> params[i].value.l);
> break;
> case VIR_DOMAIN_MEMORY_PARAM_ULLONG:
> - vshPrint(ctl, "%-15s: %llu\n", params[i].field,
> - params[i].value.ul);
> + {
> + unsigned long long max_kbytes = INT64_MAX >> 10;
Yuck - why do the clients have to know the magic value? Why not patch
the source to actually return INT64_MAX rather than INT64_MAX>>10 when
returning unlimited?
Actually, due to the issue of cross-versioning between virsh and the
actual libvirt running, we may have to check for both values. But even
having a constant (VIR_DOMAIN_MEMORY_PARAM_UNLIMITED) rather than making
guests recompute things might be nice.
But overall, I like the idea of this patch.
--
Eric Blake eblake@xxxxxxxxxx +1-801-349-2682
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list