[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120209204018.GC14007@andromeda.dapyr.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 16:40:18 -0400
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nok.org>
To: Vasiliy Tolstov <v.tolstov@...fip.ru>
Cc: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com,
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/tmem: cleanup
On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 02:23:05PM +0400, Vasiliy Tolstov wrote:
> 2012/2/7 Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>:
>
> >
> > As outlined above, it is possible, but I'm not certain it is a good idea
> > to have balloon_set_new_target() exported. If you think that's
> > acceptable, I can certainly put together a patch doing that (on top
> > of the one here, and probably not immediately).
> >
> > Jan
>
> Exporting balloon_set_new_target can be grate feature to do own
> modules for balloon memory inside xen guest, becouse some times we
> need more realtime control from dom0 for memory growing speed inside
> guest.
Sounds like we have two use cases :-)
I am not seeing anything against it but I wonder if other virtualization
offerings would benefit from this as well? As in would it make sense to
export the virtio-ballon or the microsoft one as well? And perhaps have
an unified API? So that the ballloon drivers register and then have a
"virt_mem_set_new_target" exported?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists