On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 03:17:12PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Mon, 2017-03-27 at 14:24 +0200, Martin Kletzander wrote:
[...]
> > @@ -6220,10 +6220,13 @@ qemuDomainGetMemLockLimitBytes(virDomainDefPtr def)
> > goto done;
> > }
> >
> > - if (def->mem.locked) {
> > - memKB = virDomainDefGetMemoryTotal(def) + 1024 * 1024;
> > - goto done;
> > - }
> > + /* If the guest wants its memory to be locked, we need to raise the memory
> > + * locking limit so that the OS will not refuse allocation requests;
> > + * however, there is no reliable way for us to figure out how much memory
> > + * the QEMU process will allocate for its own use, so our only way out is
> > + * to remove the limit altogether. Use with extreme care */
> > + if (def->mem.locked)
> > + return VIR_DOMAIN_MEMORY_PARAM_UNLIMITED;
>
> So there is no way how one can limit the size of the memlock, other than
> setting the hard limit?
Correct.
> Are you planning on adding new element to the
> domain XML which would allow setting this number as well?
I do. Unless I forget about it again, of course :)
Well, honestly, then I feel really bad about forcing people do different
choices and changing it between releases. I don't think anyone wants to
be checking all documentation changes every release. But since there
are only two releases with the patch being in, it's probably okay. But
I would *at least* be nice to mention that the lock limit is on it's way
to the XML.
--
Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization