CFT/CFR: NUMA policy branch

[Alfred Perlstein]

> On Jul 8, 2015, at 1:57 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian at freebsd.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 8 July 2015 at 13:43, Andriy Gapon <avg at freebsd.org> wrote:
>>> On 08/07/2015 22:18, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 7/7/15 11:38 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>>>> There's a phabricator review. It's not up to date, because:
>>>> 
>>>> * it broke for a while, and
>>>> * kib requested he be sent patches, not a phabricator review.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> So Kib is complaining that his feedback is getting lost, but refuses to use a
>>> review tracker?
>> 
>> How about phabricator losing diffs? Would that be a valid complaint?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Let's not get side tracked. I've invited a variety of people to review
> and comment on this stuff. Some people want it in reviews.freebsd.org,
> some want it via diffs. Different people want work done in different
> units of work.
> 
> My plan is to get this into "good enough" state to throw into -HEAD. I
> don't even care if in 12 months it's completely replaced with an
> alternate implementation and/or API. What i care about right now is
> getting the basic pieces in place so further work and experimentation
> can be done. Right now the entry limit to evaluating any NUMA things
> on FreeBSD is "you don't, without numa.diff", and that's unacceptable.
> I completely expect that it'll change over the course of a few years.
> But the fact we still don't have even the most basic userland exposed
> API for controlling things is IMHO unacceptable and reflects poorly on
> us as a community.
> 
> So, I'm looking for less nit-picking and more "this is wrong, you
> should do this." A lot of kibs responses have been errors on my part
> that I hadn't picked up on and weren't exposed during testing. I'm
> looking for more of those. I haven't yet gone over Garrett's comments
> in too much depth; I'll look at that tonight if I don't fall asleep
> first.
> 
> The important thing here is to try and finally move the default
> available functionality along a little bit so people can get
> interested and start using this and contribute their own work.

Can we just use GitHub and move on already?  

-Alfred