On 09/29/2011 09:46 PM, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 02:22:43PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 05:14:47PM -0700, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> > > > Please post the contents of /proc/meminfo and /proc/zoneinfo
> > > > when this is happening.
> > >
> > > I just noticed that the amount of RAM the VMs had in VIRT
> > > added up to considerably more than the host's actual RAM;
> > > hard_limit is now on. So I may not be able to replicate this.
> > > :)
> >
> > Or not; even with hard_limit the VIRT value goes to hundreds of
> > MiB more than the limit. Is that expected?
>
> Yes, VIRT field refers to total memory mapped by the process, not
> paged-in memory, which is indicated by the RES field.
Yes, I'm aware of that; that isn't relevant to my question.
I would expect the *total* memory requested by a VM to never go over
the hard_limit value set in the XML file. I mean, isn't that what
the hard_limit *means*? If not, what does it mean?
VIRT memory includes both guest memory, and memory reserved (usually not
used) by qemu. Don't read too much into it.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
