From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B4BEE99422 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 09:30:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9E2FE1C556 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 09:30:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 09:30:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E0B1D4271C for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2023 09:30:24 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <39993056-a0d8-418b-8abd-71df1b86be99@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 09:30:14 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Friedrich Weber References: <20231113170916.184994-1-f.weber@proxmox.com> <20231113170916.184994-2-f.weber@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: <20231113170916.184994-2-f.weber@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.079 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH docs 1/2] pci passthrough: mention incompatibility with ballooning X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 08:30:25 -0000 Am 13.11.23 um 18:09 schrieb Friedrich Weber: > > +xref:qm_ballooning[Automatic memory allocation (ballooning)] is not possible > +when using PCI(e) passthrough. As the PCI device may use DMA (Direct Memory > +Access), QEMU needs to map the complete guest memory on VM startup. Hence, the > +QEMU process will use at least the (maximum) configured amount of VM memory and > +setting a minimum amount does not have any effect. When using PCI(e) > +passthrough, it is recommended to set memory and minimum memory to the same > +amount and keep the balloning device enabled. However, keep in mind that the typo: s/balloning/ballooning/ Is there any advantage to keeping the ballooning device enabled? > +memory consumption reported in the GUI for the VM may be much lower than the > +memory consumption of the QEMU process. Maybe mention what the reported value is?