Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

FDP plids option: accept ranges, clarify documentation, increase max #1768

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

vincentkfu
Copy link
Collaborator

Feedback is welcome.

Instead of forcing users to list every single placement ID, allow users
to specify a list of ranges (1-3, 4-6, 7, 8) for placement IDs.

Signed-off-by: Vincent Fu <[email protected]>
Add a few tests to make sure that parsing of ranges for placement ID
indices works.

Signed-off-by: Vincent Fu <[email protected]>
Make it clearer that for FDP the values specified by the plids option
are indices referencing the list of placement identifiers available to
the namespace.

Also note that it now accepts ranges.

Signed-off-by: Vincent Fu <[email protected]>
Some users have requested the ability to test a larger number of
placement IDs in a single job. Bump the max placement IDs to 128.
Change the type to 16 bits to reduce the amount of space these
additional IDs will consume.

Also bump the server version for this change.

Signed-off-by: Vincent Fu <[email protected]>
@vincentkfu vincentkfu changed the title FDP plids option: accept ranges and clarify documentation FDP plids option: accept ranges, clarify documentation, increase max Jun 5, 2024
@vincentkfu
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The last patch increases the maximum number of placement IDs a job can specify from 16 to 128. This increases the size of struct thread_options from 3288 bytes to 3480 bytes. It's not great to add 192 more bytes to this structure for an option that will only see occasional use but I can't think of a better way to do this.

@vincentkfu vincentkfu closed this Jun 6, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant