lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/3] Transition /proc/cpuinfo -> sysfs
On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 11:03:29PM -0600, Lamont R. Peterson wrote:

> > - On an HT setup, do we want link(s) pointing to sibling(s)?
>
> I like this idea, even if it is not necessary because siblings should be
> listed sequentially together. i.e. two physical CPUs with HT would be
> cpu0, cpu1, cpu2 & cpu3. Obviously, cpu0 & cpu1 go together and cpu2 &
> cpu3 also go together.

I'll bet *any* userspace code wanting to know this info would be simpler
to write if you do the cpuid calls in the app and parse internally than
walking sysfs to form an interpretation.

> > - Instead of dumping the "flags" field, should we just dump cpu
> > registers as hex strings and let the user decode (as the comment
> > for the x86_cap_flags implies.
>
> I like this. In fact, if it goes this way, then I will write a
> "cpuinfo" program that will do all the decoding as a generic tool.

http://www.codemonkey.org.uk/projects/x86info/

Ok, its x86/amd64 specific, but it does all this parsing and the like
where it should be -- userspace.

Dave

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:05    [W:0.077 / U:0.984 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site