On Mon, Jul 06, 2015 at 10:46:06PM +0800, Chen, Tiejun wrote: > On 2015/7/6 22:34, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>>>On 06.07.15 at 16:29, <george.dun...@eu.citrix.com> wrote: > >>It sounds like part of the problem here is a matter of domains. > >> > >>Jan cares mostly about what happens in the hypervisor. At the > >>hypervisor level, there is only the per-device configurations, and he is > >>keen that rmrrs be "strict" by default, unless there is an explicit flag > >>to relax it. (I agree with this, FWIW.) > > I can't understand this point. > > There's no any default flag/policy in the hypervisor level, and the > hypervisor doesn't do anything to RMRR by itself. > > All actions just take place when xl/xc issue our needed requirements > according to the rdm setting in .cfg. > > >> > >>What we've been arguing about is the xl layer -- what settings should > >>xl/libxl give to the hypervisor, based on what's in the domain config? > >> > >>It sounds like Jan doesn't care a great deal about it, and in any case > >>would defer to the tools maintainers, but that if asked for his advice > >>he would say that the configuration in xl.cfg should act like all the > >>other pci device configurations: that you have a domain-wide default > >>that can be overridden in the per-device setting. > >> > >>I.e.: > >>--- > >>rdm='reserve=strict' > >>pci=[ '02:0.0', '01:1.1,rdm_reserve=relaxed' ] > >>--- > >>Would pass "strict" for the first device, and "relaxed" for the second. > >> > >>Do I understand you both properly, Jan / Tiejun? > > > >Yes for me. > > > > Looks all guys would like to walk into this way in the case of RMRR, so I > can follow up this way. ( Maybe the confusion above doesn't matter now? ) >
FWIW this works for me too. Do remember to update code comment / commit message when you update your code. Wei. > Thanks > Tiejun _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel