On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 10:35:15AM +, George Dunlap wrote:
>
>
> > On Jan 31, 2021, at 6:13 PM, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 10:42:27PM +, George Dunlap wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Jan 28, 2021, at 6:26 PM, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> >>> type = "hvm"
> >>> memory =
> On Jan 31, 2021, at 6:13 PM, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 10:42:27PM +, George Dunlap wrote:
>>
>>> On Jan 28, 2021, at 6:26 PM, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>>> type = "hvm"
>>> memory = 1024
>>> maxmem = 1073741824
>>>
>>> I suspect maxmem > free Xen memory may be s
On Sun, Jan 31, 2021 at 10:13:49AM -0800, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 10:42:27PM +, George Dunlap wrote:
> >
> > > On Jan 28, 2021, at 6:26 PM, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> > > type = "hvm"
> > > memory = 1024
> > > maxmem = 1073741824
> > >
> > > I suspect maxmem > free X
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 10:42:27PM +, George Dunlap wrote:
>
> > On Jan 28, 2021, at 6:26 PM, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> > type = "hvm"
> > memory = 1024
> > maxmem = 1073741824
> >
> > I suspect maxmem > free Xen memory may be sufficient. The instances I
> > can be certain of have been maxm
> On Jan 28, 2021, at 10:56 PM, George Dunlap wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Jan 28, 2021, at 10:42 PM, George Dunlap wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 28, 2021, at 6:26 PM, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:19:41AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 27.01.2021 23:28, Elliott Mitch
> On Jan 28, 2021, at 10:42 PM, George Dunlap wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Jan 28, 2021, at 6:26 PM, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:19:41AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 27.01.2021 23:28, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 09:03:32PM +, Andrew Cooper
> On Jan 28, 2021, at 6:26 PM, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:19:41AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 27.01.2021 23:28, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 09:03:32PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
So.?? What *should* happen is that if QEMU/OVMF dirtie
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:19:41AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 27.01.2021 23:28, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 09:03:32PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >> So.?? What *should* happen is that if QEMU/OVMF dirties more memory than
> >> exists in the PoD cache, the domain gets
On 27.01.2021 23:28, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 09:03:32PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> So.?? What *should* happen is that if QEMU/OVMF dirties more memory than
>> exists in the PoD cache, the domain gets terminated.
>>
>> Irrespective, Xen/dom0 dying isn't an expected cons
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 09:03:32PM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> So.?? What *should* happen is that if QEMU/OVMF dirties more memory than
> exists in the PoD cache, the domain gets terminated.
>
> Irrespective, Xen/dom0 dying isn't an expected consequence of any normal
> action like this.
>
> Do
On 27/01/2021 20:12, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:47:19AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 26.01.2021 18:51, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>>> Okay, this has been reliably reproducing for a while. I had originally
>>> thought it was a problem of HVM plus memory != maxmem, but the
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:47:19AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 26.01.2021 18:51, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> > Okay, this has been reliably reproducing for a while. I had originally
> > thought it was a problem of HVM plus memory != maxmem, but the
> > non-immediate restart disagrees with that as
On 26.01.2021 18:51, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 12:08:15PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 25.01.2021 18:46, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 10:56:25AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 24.01.2021 05:47, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>
> ---
> Change
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 12:08:15PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 25.01.2021 18:46, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 10:56:25AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 24.01.2021 05:47, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>> Changes in v2:
> >>> - Include the obvious removal of
On 25.01.2021 18:46, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 10:56:25AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 24.01.2021 05:47, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Changes in v2:
>>> - Include the obvious removal of the goto target. Always realize you're
>>> at the wrong place when you p
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 10:56:25AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 24.01.2021 05:47, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> >
> > ---
> > Changes in v2:
> > - Include the obvious removal of the goto target. Always realize you're
> > at the wrong place when you press "send".
>
> Please could you also label t
On 25/01/2021 09:56, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 24.01.2021 05:47, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
>> Previously p2m_pod_set_cache_target() would fall back to allocating 4KB
>> pages if 2MB pages ran out. This is counterproductive since it suggests
>> severe memory pressure and is likely a precursor to a memo
On 24.01.2021 05:47, Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> Previously p2m_pod_set_cache_target() would fall back to allocating 4KB
> pages if 2MB pages ran out. This is counterproductive since it suggests
> severe memory pressure and is likely a precursor to a memory exhaustion
> panic. As such don't try to
Previously p2m_pod_set_cache_target() would fall back to allocating 4KB
pages if 2MB pages ran out. This is counterproductive since it suggests
severe memory pressure and is likely a precursor to a memory exhaustion
panic. As such don't try to fill requests for 2MB pages from 4KB pages
if 2MB pag
Previously p2m_pod_set_cache_target() would fall back to allocating 4KB
pages if 2MB pages ran out. This is counterproductive since it suggests
severe memory pressure and is likely a precursor to a memory exhaustion
panic. As such don't try to fill requests for 2MB pages from 4KB pages
if 2MB pag
20 matches
Mail list logo
