On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 03:42:12PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 16:44:42 +0800
> Peter Xu wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 09:23:47AM -0400, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > > PS:
> > > I don't have access to a suitable system to test it.
> >
> > Hmm I feel like it would be go
On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 16:44:42 +0800
Peter Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 09:23:47AM -0400, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > PS:
> > I don't have access to a suitable system to test it.
>
> Hmm I feel like it would be good to have series like this to be at
> least smoke tested somehow...
>
> How a
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 09:23:47AM -0400, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> PS:
> I don't have access to a suitable system to test it.
Hmm I feel like it would be good to have series like this to be at
least smoke tested somehow...
How about manually setup a very small max memslot size and test it on
x86?
s390 was trying to solve limited KVM memslot size issue by abusing
memory_region_allocate_system_memory(), which breaks API contract
where the function might be called only once.
Beside an invalid use of API, the approach also introduced migration
issue, since RAM chunks for each KVM_SLOT_MAX_BYTE
