On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 16:15 +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 15:45:52 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> > Mh, that's trickier than I initially though, because
> > virBitmapParseSeparator() calls virReportError() itself on parse
> > failure, and changing doesn't sound feasible.
>
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 16:37:23 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 16:15 +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 15:45:52 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> > > Mh, that's trickier than I initially though, because
> > > virBitmapParseSeparator() calls
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 15:45:52 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 14:11 +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 08:47:58 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> > > The current private XML parsing code relies on the assumption
> > > that NUMA node IDs start from 0 and
On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 14:11 +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 08:47:58 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> > The current private XML parsing code relies on the assumption
> > that NUMA node IDs start from 0 and are densely allocated,
> > neither of which is necessarily the case.
>
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 08:47:58 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> The current private XML parsing code relies on the assumption
> that NUMA node IDs start from 0 and are densely allocated,
> neither of which is necessarily the case.
>
> Change it so that the bitmap size is dynamically calculated
The current private XML parsing code relies on the assumption
that NUMA node IDs start from 0 and are densely allocated,
neither of which is necessarily the case.
Change it so that the bitmap size is dynamically calculated by
looking at NUMA node IDs instead, which ensures all nodes will
be able
