manpages ping

In D58419#1340678, @chuck wrote:

I like the approach of defining the options in each module (e.g., machdep), but it would be interesting to see what this approach looks like for one of the storage devices (e.g., NVMe) which have both their own options as well as the common blockif options.

Support module-based options sets.

@bcr @ziaee could you possibly take a look?

Address comments (formatting).

bhyvectl.8: add '--rundir' to synopsis

Address review comments about manpages.

Address review comments.

In D57372#1315046, @markj wrote:

In D57372#1314941, @ivy wrote:

if this is specific to snapshots, perhaps a new bhyve argument could be used to specify the socket directory it uses for that.

Yes, that seems better.

In D57372#1314712, @markj wrote:

In D57372#1314709, @novel wrote:

In D57372#1314650, @markj wrote:

in this case

You might further specify which case this is?

In case of running bhyve as a non-root user.

I run bhyve as a non-root user many times every day, and I don't see this.

Specifically:

$ sudo -u bhyve -g vmm \
       bhyve -M -c 2 -m 4096 -u -H -P -s 0:0,hostbridge -l bootrom,/usr/local/share/uefi-firmware/BHYVE_UEFI.fd \
                                                               -s 2:0,xhci,tablet -s 1:0,lpc \
                                                               -s 3:0,ahci,cd:/data/isos/alpine-standard-3.23.4-x86_64.iso -s 6:0,fbuf,tcp=127.0.0.1:5901 \
                                                               alpine
fbuf frame buffer base: 0x327758a00000 [sz 33554432]
Failed to bind socket "/var/run/bhyve/alpine": Permission denied

bhyve: Failed to start checkpoint thread
$

Ah, this is with snapshot support enabled I guess?

In D57372#1314650, @markj wrote:

in this case

You might further specify which case this is?

In D56498#1297019, @ivy wrote:

you may want to test this with WITHOUT_ACPI=yes, as we shouldn't build the acpi package in that case and that might break the dependency--it will still build, but you won't be able to install the package.

In D56498#1293165, @markj wrote:

But, I don't know if there's a way to express that.

Any news on this one?

Switch to approach suggested by emaste@ in https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=292686.

In D54873#1254599, @markj wrote:

If someone comes along wanting to add snapshot support for other arches, they'll have to revert this patch.

IMO it would be better to just have a check in the bhyve makefile:

.if ${MK_BHYVE_SNAPSHOT} != "no" && ${MACHINE_CPUARCH} != "amd64"
.error bhyve snapshot support is only implemented on amd64.
.endif

Couple of comments/questions:

In D54720#1251266, @siva wrote:

Thanks! Although I don't have a ports commit bit yet, so you'll have to do it :)

Thanks, feel free to merge!

Looks good, a couple of minor questions.