From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Wed Mar 7 17:46:44 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58C31F44470 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 17:46:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CFB3483D66; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 17:46:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id w27HkfQx054759; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 09:46:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd-rwg@localhost) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id w27HkfU9054758; Wed, 7 Mar 2018 09:46:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd-rwg) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <201803071746.w27HkfU9054758@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: Call for testing bhyve cpu topology additions In-Reply-To: <2b5b4f82-ee51-dfca-c505-6d15aa9fc95a@freebsd.org> To: Peter Grehan Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2018 09:46:41 -0800 (PST) CC: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2018 17:46:44 -0000 > > 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 missing/broken ATA support. The person I was helping with bhyve windows regression tests has become unavaliable. > > If I can get some significant test results back I plan to commit > > D9930 to ^head and merge it back to stable/11 3 days later. > > Standard MFC time is 3 weeks. Can you point to this some place? My understanding is that MFC is at the discretion of the committer, and the only thing the big list of rules says: 6. Changes go to FreeBSD-CURRENT before FreeBSD-STABLE unless specifically permitted by the release engineer or unless they are not applicable to FreeBSD-CURRENT. Any non-trivial or non-urgent change which is applicable should also be allowed to sit in FreeBSD-CURRENT for at least 3 days before merging so that it can be given sufficient testing. I am making a wide call for testing, above and beyond the normal process already. I am also about to pull this back to my own 11.1 systems to ensure that I spot any merge problems and if need be attach an 11.1 and 11/stable patch to the diffential. There is also a call for testing going out at byhvecon, and there has already been a year to test on this, though perhaps not in final form, at least in functional form. Regards, -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org