On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 10:42:54AM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Wed, 2015-10-21 at 17:43 -0400, John Ferlan wrote:> Andrea Bolognani (2): > tests: Add script to display nodeinfo test data > tests: Add script to copy nodeinfo test data from host > > tests/nodeinfodata/copy-from-host.sh | 113 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > tests/nodeinfodata/display.sh | 113 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 226 insertions(+) > create mode 100755 tests/nodeinfodata/copy-from-host.sh > create mode 100755 tests/nodeinfodata/display.sh I'm ambivalent on this pair. Not sure what the value of patch 1 is? What should I expect to see given the arguments? What does "ppc64_cpu --info" show? Perhaps the better question is - if you run on each directory in nodeinfodata do you get what you expect?I've run the script on every existing dataset and the output was correct, as far as I can tell. The script was immensely useful to me back when I was implementing changes to the way the nodeinfo code counts CPUs when subcorese are involved, eg. $ ./display.sh linux-subcores3 8 Threads per core: 8 Present CPUs: 0-159 Core 0: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Core 1: 8* 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Core 2: 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Core 3: 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Core 4: 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Core 5: 40* 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 Core 6: 48* 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 Core 7: 56* 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 Core 8: 64 65 66 67 68* 69 70 71 Core 9: 72* 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 Core 10: 80* 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 Core 11: 88* 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 Core 12: 96* 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 Core 13: 104* 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 Core 14: 112* 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 Core 15: 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 Core 16: 128* 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 Core 17: 136* 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 Core 18: 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 Core 19: 152* 153* 154* 155* 156* 157* 158* 159* You can see at a glance there's something wrong with this configuration - why is CPU 68 online? What about the last line? This kind of report is especially useful when dealing with processors with a high number of CPUs.As for patch 2, one would have to know they should use the copy-from-host.sh script. Perhaps what might be better and/or somewhat more interesting on this one is some make check rule that scans the nodeinfodata trees looking for files that shouldn't be there. That way if someone does use their own methodology to copy over the tree we'd know it (and could message to use the copy-from-host.sh script...I agree, as it stands it's not very discoverable, plus adding the check you suggest would also prevent something like e739d95 from ever being needed again. I'll work on that as soon as I have some time.
Maybe simple .gitignore entry would suffice.
Cheers. -- Andrea Bolognani Software Engineer - Virtualization Team
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list