Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 14 Oct 2011 17:43:37 -0700 | From | Maxim Uvarov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] XEN_DOMAIN_MEMORY options. |
| |
On 10/14/2011 04:41 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > On 10/14/2011 04:33 PM, Maxim Uvarov wrote: >> On 10/14/2011 04:00 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: >>> On 10/14/2011 03:36 PM, Maxim Uvarov wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Please find here patches for XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY: >>>> >>>> [PATCH 1/2] xen: Fix XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY to be selectable >>>> [PATCH 2/2] xen: Make XEN_MAX_DOMAIN_MEMORY have more sensible >>>> defaults for 32-bit builds >>> >>> What's the rationale? >>> >>> J >> >> The first patch is actually bug fix. You can not define just "int" >> without description in Kconfig. As the result this option will not be >> visible in menuconfig. Even if you will change it in .config make >> oldconfig will set it up for default value. So you need to add any >> description to it as all others int options have. > > No, that was deliberate, because I don't really think there's a need to > change it. >
From that point of view it's not clear why this option is still in Kconfig?
Jeremy, can you please share more details about this? I see people are having troubles with this option and in different kernels I see different work arounds for it. For example: http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2011-01/msg01841.html
Maxim. >> >> Second patch is more optional and it's just suggestion to use for 32 >> bit more corresponding value. > > While it would be very silly to put 128GB of actual RAM on a 32-bit > machine, systems can have non-contiguous RAM placed at high addresses, > which would no longer be accessible. > > J
| |