[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Proposed new "memory capacity claim" hypercall/feature
>>> On 08.11.12 at 20:16, Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx] >> >>> On 08.11.12 at 11:50, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On 08/11/2012 09:47, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> The only thing that indeed is - on non-preemptible kernels - done >> >> only on exit to user mode is the eventual entering of the scheduler. >> > >> > That alone may still be an argument for restricting the batch size from the >> > toolstack? >> >> Yes, this clearly prohibits unlimited batches. But not being able to >> schedule should be less restrictive than not being able to run >> softirqs, so I'd still put under question whether the limit shouldn't >> be bumped. > > Wait, please define unlimited. Unlimited as in unlimited. > I think we are in agreement from previous discussion that, to solve > the TOCTOU race, the heap_lock must be held for the entire allocation > for a domain creation. True? That's only one way (and as Keir already responded, not one that we should actually pursue). The point about being fast enough was rather made to allow a decision towards the feasibility of intermediately disabling tmem (or at least allocations originating from it) in particular (I'm not worried about micro-allocations - the tool stack has to provide some slack in its calculations for this anyway). Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |