[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170311140946.GA1860@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 06:09:47 -0800
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@...el.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
qemu-devel@...gnu.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Liang Li <liang.z.li@...el.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>,
Amit Shah <amit.shah@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Liang Li <liliang324@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 kernel 3/5] virtio-balloon: implementation of
VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_CHUNK_TRANSFER
On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 07:59:31PM +0800, Wei Wang wrote:
> I'm thinking what if the guest needs to transfer these much physically
> continuous
> memory to host: 1GB+2MB+64KB+32KB+16KB+4KB.
> Is it going to use Six 64-bit chunks? Would it be simpler if we just
> use the 128-bit chunk format (we can drop the previous normal 64-bit
> format)?
Is that a likely thing for the guest to need to do though? Freeing a
1GB page is much more liikely, IMO.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists