[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] vl.c: Support multiple CPU ranges on -numa option



On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 01:35:14PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost redhat com> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:50:08AM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> >> Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost redhat com> writes:
> >> 
> >> > This allows ":" to be used a separator between each CPU range, so the
> >> > command-line may look like:
> >> >
> >> >   -numa node,cpus=A-B:C-D
> >> >
> >> > Note that the following format, currently used by libvirt:
> >> >
> >> >   -numa nodes,cpus=A-B,C-D
> >> >
> >> > will _not_ work, as "," is the option separator for the command-line
> >> > option parser, and it would require changing the -numa option parsing
> >> > code to handle "cpus" as a special case.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost redhat com>
> >> > ---
> >> > Changes v2:
> >> >  - Use ":" as separator
> >> >  - Document the new format
> >> 
> >> See also discussion on multi-valued keys in command line option
> >> arguments and config files in v1 thread.  Hopefully we can reach a
> >> conclusion soon, and then we'll see whether this patch is what we want.
> >
> > Yeah, let's drop this patch by now. I am starting to be convinced that
> > "cpus=A,cpus=B,cpus=C" is the best approach. It is not pretty, but at
> > least it uses generic parser code instead of yet another ad-hoc
> > parser.
> 
> No, we cannot rely on this behavior.  We had to do it to support
> backwards compat with netdev but it should not be used anywhere else.

Why? What should be the proper and generic way to represent and parse
lists, then?

There are many arguments being exposed at the v1 thread. See
 Message-ID: <512CC6D6 4060703 redhat com>.

-- 
Eduardo


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]