Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 17:49:57 -0700 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: CFT/CFR: NUMA policy branch Message-ID: <CAJ-VmonyTfSxj%2BD=FN3TUCO33w4vGqh1REQqx-8rd-JcArfqSA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmo=SnqXTF5m65haKqrVf699zinyXs%2BQdvR6V88CW7vooCw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAJ-Vmo=SnqXTF5m65haKqrVf699zinyXs%2BQdvR6V88CW7vooCw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, I've updated the NUMA branch again: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/compare/master...erikarn:local/adrian_numa_policy The main fixes: * (stas) Added short versions of options to numactl; * (stas, wblock, rpaulo) Documentation and code fixes during review; * (kib) updated the userland facing API to not include seq_t; * fixed up a couple of silly bugs that gcc-4.2 picked up; * fixed up compile issues on gcc-4.2. I've tested this on mips32, mips64, x86 non-NUMA (GENERIC) and NUMA hardware. kib@ has requested that this use the procctl() API rather than adding new syscalls. procctl() currently doesn't support P_LWPID (ie thread) based identifiers for any of its manipulation, so I'd have to go and add that. I think this is close to what I'd like to commit. I'd appreciate another review. Thanks, -adrian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-VmonyTfSxj%2BD=FN3TUCO33w4vGqh1REQqx-8rd-JcArfqSA>