On 05/17/2012 12:46 PM, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 05/16/2012 08:58 PM, Eric Blake wrote: >> On 05/16/2012 11:04 AM, Orit Wasserman wrote: >> >>>>> +- "value": cache size in bytes (json-int) >>>> >>>> Would it be any easier to take 'order' (log2 of the size) instead of the >>>> actual cache size? That is, instead of calling "value":1048576, I would >>>> rather type "value":20. >>> Well the user is considering how much memory is going to be used and I >>> though that it >>> is simpler to use 1G than 30. >> >> Libvirt can cope with either style, so maybe it's worth waiting for >> anyone else to chime in on which style is easier. > > Let's be consistent. It's best to use bytes everywhere (not kilobytes, > not megabytes, not pages, not order, or anything else we can come up with). > > If you really want to specify order (not that I can think of a reason > why), we can use a suffix: 20ORD == 1M == 1048576. That is what used at the moment. > > btw, maybe it's better to handle a non-power-of-two cache size by > rounding down. Less errors, less puzzlement, and less memory used. Sounds good to me.
Orit >
