Neel Natu wrote: > Hi Roman, > > On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 3:45 AM, Roman Bogorodskiy <no...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > I've created an initial version of the patch which allows more flexible > > vcpu pinning configuration. > > > > Current schema is: > > > > bhyve -p N > > > > pins vcpu i to hostcpu N + i. > > > > The propsed extension is: > > > > bhyve -p N:M .... -p 0:1 -p 3:5 > > > > which pins vcpu N to host pcpu M. Option needs to be specified > > individually for each vcpu. > > > > So it works like that for me: > > > > sudo /usr/sbin/bhyve -p 0:0 -p 1:3 -c 2 ... > > > > # sudo cpuset -g -t 100262 > > tid 100262 mask: 0 > > # sudo cpuset -g -t 100264 > > tid 100264 mask: 3 > > > > PS I used cpumat_t* array to store these values instead of int, because > > if the idea is OK, I'll extend it to support ranges like e.g. cpuset(1) > > supports, e.g.: "1:2-5". > > > > The questions are: > > > > - Is it OK to chance '-p' arg syntax or it's better to introduce a new > > one? > > > > I think we can reuse the "-p" option unless anybody objects vociferously. > > > - Is the syntax OK (currently: 'vcpu:pcpu', later > > 'vcpu:pcpuN-pcpuM,pcpuX")? > > Yup, I think that works fine. > > The patch looks good in general but I have a few comments: > > - Scope of 'vcpupmap[]' should be restricted to 'static'. > > - usage() and man page need to be updated. > > - pincpu_parse(): > The option parsing can be made much easier by using: > > if (sscanf(str, "%d:%d", &vcpu, &pcpu) == 2) { > /* success */ > } else { > return (-1); > } > > If the same vcpu is specified multiple times then we should > malloc(sizeof(cpuset_t)) only the first time: > > if (vcpumap[vcpu] != NULL) > mask = vcpumap[vcpu]; > else > mask = malloc(sizeof(cpuset_t)); > > We need to range-check 'vcpu' before using it as an index into the > 'vcpumap[]' array.
Thanks for the comments, I'll make the fixes you pointed and re-send the patch. Roman Bogorodskiy
pgpNXJKIF45X9.pgp
Description: PGP signature