On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 10:10:59AM +0900, Saori Fukuta wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:53:17 -0400 Daniel Veillard wrote:
On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 10:45:44AM -0500, Ryan Harper wrote:
I think we should support the same cpuset notation that Xen supports, which means including ranges (1-4) and negation (^1). These two features make describing large ranges much more compact.
Enclosed is a rewrite of the cpuset notations, which can plug as a replacement for the current code in xend_internals, it should support the existing syntax currently used to parse xend topology strings, and also alllow ranges and negation. It's not as a patch but as a standlone replacement program which can be used to test (in spirit of the old topology.c one from Beth). I guess that's okay, check the test output (and possibly extend the test cases in tests array), It tried to think of everything including the weird \\n python xend bug and the 'no cpus' in cell cases. Just dump tst.c in libvirt/src, add $(INCLUDES) to the $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -I../include -o tst tst.c .... line and run make tst ./tst and check the output (also enclosed), The parsing is done in a slightly different way, but that should not change the output,
I checked the test output. It seems work fine to me ! And also, how about this one for specifying "all" as an input ?
All is the default, i.e. you don't specify a cpumap in the XML format. Daniel -- Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/ Daniel Veillard | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ veillard@redhat.com | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/