[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 3/3] tools: introduce parameter max_wp_ram_ranges.
>>> On 27.01.16 at 15:56, <yu.c.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 1/27/2016 10:32 PM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 27.01.16 at 15:13, <yu.c.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> About the truncation issue: >>> I do not quite follow. Will this hurt if the value configured does >>> not exceed 4G? What about a type cast? >> >> A typecast would not alter behavior in any way. And of course >> a problem only arises if the value was above 4 billion. You either >> need to refuse such values while the attempt is made to set it. >> or you need to deal with the full range of possible values. Likely >> the former is the better (and I wonder whether the upper >> bound shouldn't be forced even lower than 4 billion). > > Oh, I see. A check with the upper bound sounds better. Using 4G as the > upper bound is a little conservative, but I do not have any better > criteria right now. :) But when making that decision keep security in mind: How much memory would it take to populate 4G rangeset nodes? Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |