Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 17:00:27 +0200 From: Mihai Carabas <mihai.carabas@gmail.com> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Cc: Andrei Martin <andrei.cos.martin@gmail.com>, freebsd-arm@freebsd.org, freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [bhyve][arm64] Number of allowed vcpus Message-ID: <CANg1yUtg3jVV8xPVHZBR5UUyzAgBBCSot=HsE=AQjB7hq_1FZA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <202101131455.10DEthxJ041740@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> References: <CANg1yUshoDff6ahaGY1Au=BdnzuX2yh1n-NxWfUaCnmSmzOVMg@mail.gmail.com> <202101131455.10DEthxJ041740@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 4:55 PM Rodney W. Grimes < freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > >From my perspective bhyve should use what is stated in the device tree > if > > no parameter is given and throw an error when N is greater than the > device > > tree value. > > > > Mihai > > That seems to be one reasonable solution. I am not very informed on what > the CPU over commit situation is on an ARM cpu with respect to > virtualization. > > I would also propose as an alternative to just do what was asked by the > user, which is the current amd64 implementation, OR do as asked and > emmit a warning message. > > I would ask given what was said above: isnt this the same situation as > if the sum of all VM VCPU's is more than the total cores in the system? > That is a very common situation, and one we must not restrict. > We are talking here about the device tree of the guest. If you boot up a guest with a device tree of X vcpus, why specify something else on the command line? > > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 1:55 PM Andrei Martin < > andrei.cos.martin@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > While working on enabling multiple virtual cpus for the arm64 virtual > > > machine > > > I used the bhyve's "-c N" parameter to create N cpus (it gets only the > > > cpus, in contrast to the amd64). If N is smaller than the number of > cores > > > described in the device tree it will enable only N and if it's larger > it > > > will enable only the number of cores from the device tree. > > > > > > I don't know if it is the best approach. Another way would be to enable > > > all the cpus from the device tree, no more, no less. > > > > > > Do you have any suggestions? > > > > > > Andrei > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org mailing list > > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-virtualization > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-virtualization-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > > -- > Rod Grimes > rgrimes@freebsd.org >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CANg1yUtg3jVV8xPVHZBR5UUyzAgBBCSot=HsE=AQjB7hq_1FZA>