On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 12:00 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
(2012/08/23 11:01), Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
(2012/08/22 22:41), Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 17:43 +0900, Yoshihiro YUNOMAE wrote:
From: Masami Hiramatsu masami.hiramatsu...@hitachi.com
Count
On Wed 22 Aug 2012 10:13:44 PM CST, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
Il 22/08/2012 15:13, Stefan Hajnoczi ha scritto:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2010-12/msg01741.html
This is a real problem in practice. IE. the USB CD-ROM on this POWER7
blade limits transfers to 0x1e000 bytes for
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 11:19:04PM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 12:33:17PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Hmm, so this will busy wait which is unelegant.
We need some event IMO.
No, it does not busy wait. leak_balloon() is mutual exclusive with migration
steps, so
Il 23/08/2012 11:31, Cong Meng ha scritto:
For disks, this should be fixed simply by using scsi-block instead of
scsi-generic.
CD-ROMs are indeed more complicated because burning CDs cannot be done
with syscalls. :/
So, as the problem exist to CD-ROM, I will continue to get these patches
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 23/08/2012 11:31, Cong Meng ha scritto:
For disks, this should be fixed simply by using scsi-block instead of
scsi-generic.
CD-ROMs are indeed more complicated because burning CDs cannot be done
with syscalls. :/
Il 23/08/2012 12:08, Stefan Hajnoczi ha scritto:
I'm still trying to understand the extent of the problem.
The problem occurs for _USB_ CD-ROMs according to Ben. Passthrough of
USB storage devices should be done via USB passthrough, not virtio-scsi.
If we do USB passthrough via the SCSI
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 23/08/2012 12:08, Stefan Hajnoczi ha scritto:
I'm still trying to understand the extent of the problem.
The problem occurs for _USB_ CD-ROMs according to Ben. Passthrough of
USB storage devices should be done via
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 01:01:07PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
So, when remove_common() calls leak_balloon() looping on
vb-num_pages, that won't become a tight loop.
The scheme was apparently working before this series, and it will remain
working
after it.
It seems that before
(2012/08/23 18:08), Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 12:00 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
(2012/08/23 11:01), Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
(2012/08/22 22:41), Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 2012-08-22 at 17:43 +0900, Yoshihiro YUNOMAE wrote:
From: Masami Hiramatsu
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 09:13:39AM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 01:01:07PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
So, when remove_common() calls leak_balloon() looping on
vb-num_pages, that won't become a tight loop.
The scheme was apparently working before this series,
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 03:34:32PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
So, nothing has changed here.
Yes, your patch does change things:
leak_balloon now might return without freeing any pages.
In that case we will not be making any progress, and just
spin, pinning CPU.
That's a transitory
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:06:07AM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 03:34:32PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
So, nothing has changed here.
Yes, your patch does change things:
leak_balloon now might return without freeing any pages.
In that case we will not be
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:53:29PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:06:07AM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 03:34:32PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
So, nothing has changed here.
Yes, your patch does change things:
leak_balloon now
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:21:29PM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:53:29PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:06:07AM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 03:34:32PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
So, nothing has changed
On 08/23/2012 11:54 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:21:29PM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:53:29PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 10:06:07AM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 03:34:32PM +0300, Michael
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:03:15PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
Not longer - apparently forever unless user resend the leak command.
It's wrong - it should
1. not tell host if nothing was done
2. after migration finished leak and tell host
Agreed. If the balloon is told to leak N pages,
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 01:06:48PM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:03:15PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
Not longer - apparently forever unless user resend the leak command.
It's wrong - it should
1. not tell host if nothing was done
2. after migration finished leak
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:53:28PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Basically it was very simple: we assumed page-lru was never
touched for an allocated page, so it's safe to use it for
internal book-keeping by the driver.
Now, this is not the case anymore, you add some logic in mm/ that
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 07:25:05PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:53:28PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Basically it was very simple: we assumed page-lru was never
touched for an allocated page, so it's safe to use it for
internal book-keeping by the driver.
On 08/23/2012 01:28 PM, Rafael Aquini wrote:
What about keep a conter at virtio_balloon structure on how much pages are
isolated from balloon's list and check it at leak time?
if the counter gets 0 than we can safely put leak_balloon() to wait until
balloon page list gets completely refilled.
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 02:28:45PM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 07:25:05PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:53:28PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Basically it was very simple: we assumed page-lru was never
touched for an allocated page,
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 02:36:16AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 02:28:45PM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 07:25:05PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:53:28PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Basically it was very
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 02:36:16AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
I would wake it each time after adding a page, then it
can stop waiting when it leaks enough.
But again, it's cleaner to just keep tracking all
pages, let mm hang on to them by keeping a reference.
Here is a rough idea on
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 09:33:53PM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 02:36:16AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
I would wake it each time after adding a page, then it
can stop waiting when it leaks enough.
But again, it's cleaner to just keep tracking all
pages, let mm
On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 11:08 +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 23/08/2012 11:31, Cong Meng ha scritto:
For disks, this should be fixed simply by using scsi-block instead of
scsi-generic.
CD-ROMs are indeed more
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 09:38:48PM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 09:33:53PM -0300, Rafael Aquini wrote:
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 02:36:16AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
I would wake it each time after adding a page, then it
can stop waiting when it leaks enough.
Call for Papers: The Third International Workshop on Data Intensive
Computing in the Clouds (DataCloud 2012)
November 11, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
(http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/faculty/tkosar/datacloud2012)
Co-Located with Super Computing 2012, November 10-16, Salt Lake City, UT,
USA
On 08/23/2012 07:36 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
---
virtio-balloon: replace page-lru list with page-private.
The point is to free up page-lru for use by compaction.
Warning: completely untested, will provide tested version
if we agree on this direction.
A singly linked list is not going
28 matches
Mail list logo
