Re: [libvirt] [BUG] mlock support breakage
On Tue, 14 Mar 2017 19:40:38 +0100
Andrea Bolognani <abologna(a)redhat.com> wrote:
It's unfortunate that the current, buggy behavior made
it look like you didn't necessarily have to worry about
this. If we fix it, existing guests will fail to start
right away instead of possibly crashing in the future:
while that's going to be very annoying in the short run,
It breaks existing guests, so it's beyond annoying.
it's arguably better than illuding people their guests
will be good in the long run while in reality we can't
provide such guarantee.
Luiz mentioned the fact that you can't set the memory
locking limit to "unlimited" with the current <hard_limit>
element: that's something we can, and should, address.
With that implemented, the administrator will have full
control on the memory limit and will be able to implement
the policy that best suits the use case at hand.
Asking <locked/> users to set <hard_limit> to "unlimited"
is a much worse solution than automatically setting the
memory lock limit to infinity in libvirt, for the reasons
I outlined in my first email.
PS: Still, we should have "unlimited" support for <hard_limit>