[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH v3 04/13] XML parsing for memory tunables



* Nikunj A. Dadhania <nikunj linux vnet ibm com> [2010-10-08 14:43:34]:

> On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 14:10:53 +0530, Balbir Singh <balbir linux vnet ibm com> wrote:
> > * Nikunj A. Dadhania <nikunj linux vnet ibm com> [2010-10-08 12:00:44]:
> > 
> > > On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 12:49:29 +0100, "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange redhat com> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 12:47:22PM +0530, Nikunj A. Dadhania wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, 4 Oct 2010 12:16:42 +0530, Balbir Singh <balbir linux vnet ibm com> wrote:
> > > > > > * Nikunj A. Dadhania <nikunj linux vnet ibm com> [2010-09-28 15:26:30]:
> > > <snip>
> > > > > > > +        unsigned long hard_limit;
> > > > > > > +        unsigned long soft_limit;
> > > > > > > +        unsigned long min_guarantee;
> > > > > > > +        unsigned long swap_hard_limit;
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The hard_limit, soft_limit, swap_hard_limit are s64 and the value is
> > > > > > in bytes. What is the unit supported in this implementation?
> > > > 
> > > > Actually if libvirt is built on 32bit these aren't big enough - make
> > > > them into 'unsigned long long' data types I reckon.
> > > > 
> > > I was thinking that as we are having the unit of KB, we would be able to
> > > represent 2^42 bytes of memory limit, ie. 4 Terabytes. Won't this suffice in
> > > case of 32bit?
> > >
> > 
> > How would you represent -1 (2^63 -1) as unlimited or max limit we use
> > today? 
> > 
> I think I have answered this question in the thread: this is specific to
> cgroup that -1 means unlimited, this may not be true for other HVs.

OK, so how do we handle unlimited values in general?

-- 
	Three Cheers,
	Balbir


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]