Re: [PATCH 0/4] vl: Prioritize device realizations

[Peter Xu]

On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 09:17:57AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> I know, whenever someone proposes a way to tackle part of a challenging
> problem, everybody discovers their hopes and dreams and suddenly you
> have to go all the way to solve the complete problem. The end result is
> that there is no improvement at all instead of incremental improvement.

Yeah, there's the trade-off; we either not moving forward or otherwise we could
potentially bring (more) chaos so the code is less maintainable.  Before I'm
sure I won't do the latter and convince the others, I need to hold off a bit. 
:-)

> I'm not planning on letting the user set the actual number of memslots
> to use, only an upper limit. But to me, it's fundamentally the same: the
> user has to enable this behavior explicitly.

I'm not familiar enough on virtio-mem's side, it's just that it will stop
working when the ideal value (even in a very corner case) is less than the
maximum specified, then that trick stops people from specifying the ideal.  But
if it's bigger the better then indeed I don't see much to worry.

-- 
Peter Xu