On 13/06/2016 12:50, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > More generally, it feels like this is taking as down a path towards > actively managing the guest kernel VM from the host. Is this really > a path we want to be going down, given that its going to take us into > increasing non-portable concepts which are potentially different for > each guest OS kernel. Is this drop caches feature at all applicable > to Windows, OS-X, *BSD guest OS impls of the balloon driver ? If it > is applicable, are the 3 fixed constants you've defined at all useful > to those other OS ? > > I'm warying of us taking a design path which is so Linux specific it > isn't useful elsewhere. IOW, just because we can do this, doesn't mean > we should do this...
I agree. And if anything, this should be handled through the guest agent. Paolo
