[libvirt] [PATCH 2/2] FreeBSD: stub out CPU affinity functions.

[Daniel P. Berrange]

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 09:09:52PM +0400, Roman Bogorodskiy wrote:
>   Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 06:47:56PM +0400, Roman Bogorodskiy wrote:
> > > ---
> > >  src/util/processinfo.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/src/util/processinfo.c b/src/util/processinfo.c
> > > index b1db049..4822bcc 100644
> > > --- a/src/util/processinfo.c
> > > +++ b/src/util/processinfo.c
> > > @@ -168,6 +168,28 @@ realloc:
> > >      return 0;
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > +#elif defined(__FreeBSD__)
> > > +
> > > +int virProcessInfoSetAffinity(pid_t pid ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED,
> > > +                              virBitmapPtr map ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
> > > +{
> > > +    return 0;
> > > +}
> > 
> > Hmm, I'm somewhat loathe to be pretending that this works.
> > 
> > IMHO, we should look at 'map' and if it is all-1s then
> > we should accept it trivially. If it is not all-1s then
> > we should raise an error so the user knows their requested
> > config was not honoured
> 
> The reasoning behind this change is, as subject says, provide a stub
> while there's no complete implementation available. I've been using
> it for a couple of weeks and didn't notice any problems.
> 
> Would not it make sense to just throw a warning or not critical error to
> user so he knows there's no affinity? I was planning to create a
> full-feature implementation of that after I'm done with the networking
> support.

Ok, since you're planning on implementing this properly, I'll accept
this patch as is for now

Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|