Re: Call for testing bhyve cpu topology additions

I shall iterate again, this change makes no change to what the guests sees if you use the old method sysctl hw.vmm.topology.cores_per_package or hw.vmm.topology.threads_per_core to set these values, it is purely a interface enhancement that makes these tuneables easy to access from userland

Re: Call for testing bhyve cpu topology additions

And as mentioned in the review, I'd also like to see your Windows desktop guest test results with this change. I do not run any windows in bhyve as bhyve can not run the windows I use due to missing/broken ATA support. The person I was helping with bhyve windows regression tests has become

Re: Call for testing bhyve cpu topology additions

> >>And as mentioned in the review, I'd also like to see your Windows > >> desktop guest test results with this change. > > > > I do not run any windows in bhyve as bhyve can not run the > > windows I use due to missing/broken ATA support. > > The person I was helping with bhyve windows

Call for testing bhyve cpu topology additions

There is a new version of the CPU topology review up at http://reviews.freebsd.org/D9930 I would like to ask that if people can test this and provide feedback that they do so. It has some undesired side effects on vm-bhyve and probably other down stream tools, I am in the process of

Re: Call for testing bhyve cpu topology additions

I would like to ask that if people can test this and provide feedback that they do so. And as mentioned in the review, I'd also like to see your Windows desktop guest test results with this change. If I can get some significant test results back I plan to commit D9930 to ^head and merge it

Re: Call for testing bhyve cpu topology additions

> > I would like to ask that if people can test this and provide > > feedback that they do so. > > And as mentioned in the review, I'd also like to see your Windows > desktop guest test results with this change. I do not run any windows in bhyve as bhyve can not run the windows I use due to

[Differential] D14473: userboot: add callbacks to set unrestricted guest mode

grehan added a comment. So a comment on this: in general, api's are not added to FreeBSD that don't have base-system clients that use them, or for a good reason. I think this falls into the latter but I'd like to cut it down a bit. - can the get_unrestricted_guest() routine be removed ?

[Differential] D14473: userboot: add callbacks to set unrestricted guest mode

fabian.freyer_physik.tu-berlin.de added a comment. In D14473#306827 , @grehan wrote: > So a comment on this: in general, api's are not added to FreeBSD that don't have base-system clients that use them, or for a good reason. I think this falls

[Differential] D14473: userboot: add callbacks to set unrestricted guest mode

fabian.freyer_physik.tu-berlin.de added 1 blocking reviewer(s): grehan. REVISION DETAIL https://reviews.freebsd.org/D14473 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://reviews.freebsd.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: fabian.freyer_physik.tu-berlin.de, imp, rgrimes, #bhyve, grehan Cc: grehan, imp,