[XenPPC] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 10/10][TOOLS][XM-TEST] Fix Memory assumptions in the create tests

2006-11-01 Thread Ewan Mellor
On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 01:16:03PM +1100, Tony Breeds wrote: On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 02:54:16PM +0100, Ewan Mellor wrote: OK, I've taken the most of the patch, but with the 16MiB low limit left in. What's this bit though (I haven't taken this yet)? Hi Ewan, What are the

[XenPPC] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 10/10][TOOLS][XM-TEST] Fix Memory assumptions in the create tests

2006-10-30 Thread Tony Breeds
On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 02:54:16PM +0100, Ewan Mellor wrote: OK, I've taken the most of the patch, but with the 16MiB low limit left in. What's this bit though (I haven't taken this yet)? Hi Ewan, What are the outstanding issues with this patch? I'm keen to get it merged if you're

[XenPPC] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 10/10][TOOLS][XM-TEST] Fix Memory assumptions in the create tests

2006-10-24 Thread Ewan Mellor
On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 09:45:36AM +1000, Tony Breeds wrote: Okay leaving it set at 16MiB, is probably the right thing. If we get to a state the an architecture or OS needs to vary it we can look at something like tooLittleMem() then. OK, I've taken the most of the patch, but with the 16MiB

[XenPPC] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 10/10][TOOLS][XM-TEST] Fix Memory assumptions in the create tests

2006-10-24 Thread Tony Breeds
On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 02:54:16PM +0100, Ewan Mellor wrote: OK, I've taken the most of the patch, but with the 16MiB low limit left in. Great. What's this bit though (I haven't taken this yet)? Essentially the XenDomain class does not respect the arch defaults where as XmTestDomain does.

[XenPPC] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 10/10][TOOLS][XM-TEST] Fix Memory assumptions in the create tests

2006-10-23 Thread Ewan Mellor
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 01:22:31PM +1000, Tony Breeds wrote: Fix Memory assumptions in the create tests. Use the architecture specified idea of minimum memory. Signed-off-by: Tony Breeds [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- [Snip] diff -r 69035d8a5f2a -r 2854ceda351e

[XenPPC] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 10/10][TOOLS][XM-TEST] Fix Memory assumptions in the create tests

2006-10-23 Thread Tony Breeds
On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 11:55:22AM +0100, Ewan Mellor wrote: I'm not convinced by this one. Just because 32 MiB is known to be safe, that doesn't mean that 31 MiB will cause the domain to crash. The 16 MiB value is deliberately _far_ too small, so that the OOM killer kicks in, and the