Skip to content

(doc) Describe how xc_domain_claim_pages() is used to claim pages #6343

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Conversation

bernhardkaindl
Copy link
Collaborator

(doc) Describe how xc_domain_claim_pages() is used to claim pages

Signed-off-by: Bernhard Kaindl <bernhard.kaindl@cloud.com>
Copy link
Member

@psafont psafont left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks like xen documentation rather than xen api one ;)

I'm working a branch that uses this call: 44a5ca4

@bernhardkaindl
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This looks like xen documentation rather than xen api one ;)

Yes, Xen desperately needs a Hugo site. 😉
I'll also look into adding a library reference to the Sphinx/RST docs site of Xen; it just hasn't been the focus yet.

I'm working on a branch that uses this call: 44a5ca4

Nice, it looks good :)


> [!info]
> - Allocations for outstanding claims are expected to always be successful.
> - But this reduces the amount of outstanding claims if the domain.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Typo: of

@lindig
Copy link
Contributor

lindig commented Mar 10, 2025

On first reading, I find the logic how a claimed amount changes quite a bit if-then-else heavy. Maybe a state diagram could help to clarify this.

@psafont psafont added this pull request to the merge queue Mar 11, 2025
Merged via the queue into xapi-project:master with commit dafcaab Mar 11, 2025
17 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants