On Sat, 03 Aug 2013 15:56:50 +0200
Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 26.07.2013 16:37, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
> > Il 26/07/2013 14:51, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
> >> On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 11:26:16 +0200
> >> Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >>> Il 26/07/2013 09:38, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
> >> I agree that s
Paolo Bonzini writes:
> Il 26/07/2013 14:51, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
>> On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 11:26:16 +0200
>> Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>>> Il 26/07/2013 09:38, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
Perhaps denying memory add and suggesting node migration to a node with
more memory would be right
Am 26.07.2013 16:37, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
> Il 26/07/2013 14:51, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
>> On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 11:26:16 +0200
>> Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>> Il 26/07/2013 09:38, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
>> I agree that specifying the policy on every hotplug complicates
>> management and
Il 26/07/2013 14:51, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
> On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 11:26:16 +0200
> Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>> Il 26/07/2013 09:38, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
>>> Perhaps denying memory add and suggesting node migration to a node with
>>> more memory would be right approach, otherwise user is bou
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013 11:26:16 +0200
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 26/07/2013 09:38, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
> > Perhaps denying memory add and suggesting node migration to a node with
> > more memory would be right approach, otherwise user is bound to be hit by
> > cross node penalty.
>
> Or better
Il 26/07/2013 09:38, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
> Perhaps denying memory add and suggesting node migration to a node with
> more memory would be right approach, otherwise user is bound to be hit by
> cross node penalty.
Or better, the user can first change the policy from "bind" to
"preferred", and
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 14:41:36 +0200
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 24/07/2013 13:34, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
> > On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 11:41:04 +0200
> > Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >
> >> Il 24/07/2013 10:36, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
> >>> On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 19:09:26 +0200
> >>> Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
Il 24/07/2013 13:34, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
> On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 11:41:04 +0200
> Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>> Il 24/07/2013 10:36, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
>>> On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 19:09:26 +0200
>>> Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>>
Il 23/07/2013 18:23, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
> - if slot p
On Wed, 24 Jul 2013 11:41:04 +0200
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 24/07/2013 10:36, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
> > On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 19:09:26 +0200
> > Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >
> >> Il 23/07/2013 18:23, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
> >>> - if slot property is not specified on -device/device_add comman
Il 24/07/2013 10:36, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 19:09:26 +0200
> Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>> Il 23/07/2013 18:23, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
>>> - if slot property is not specified on -device/device_add command,
>>> treat default value as request for assigning DimmDevice to
>>>
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 19:09:26 +0200
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 23/07/2013 18:23, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
> > - if slot property is not specified on -device/device_add command,
> > treat default value as request for assigning DimmDevice to
> > the first free slot.
>
> Even with "-m" instead of "-
Il 23/07/2013 18:23, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
> - if slot property is not specified on -device/device_add command,
> treat default value as request for assigning DimmDevice to
> the first free slot.
Even with "-m" instead of "-numa mem", I think this is problematic
because we still need to separa
- if slot property is not specified on -device/device_add command,
treat default value as request for assigning DimmDevice to
the first free slot.
- if slot is provided with -device/device_add command, attempt to
use it or fail command if it's already occupied.
Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov
---
13 matches
Mail list logo
