On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 09:48:24AM -0400, John Ferlan wrote: > > > On 10/07/2016 09:32 AM, Pavel Hrdina wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:35:35AM -0400, John Ferlan wrote: > >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1381714 > >> > >> Alter the descriptions to match what the cpu_cycles actually is > >> > >> Signed-off-by: John Ferlan <jferlan@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> docs/formatdomain.html.in | 2 +- > >> src/libvirt-domain.c | 2 +- > >> src/util/virperf.h | 2 +- > >> tools/virsh.pod | 9 +++++---- > >> 4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > Update also doc text in include/libvirt/libvirt-domain.h. > > > > Thanks ... > > I thought about this one too - it was a bit more tricky since the > existing text doesn't say it's representing "cpu cycles one instruction > needs" rather it's indicating the cpu cycles "which can be used"... > > Anyway, how about if I change from : > > * Macro for typed parameter name that represents cpu_cycles perf event > * which can be used to measure how many cpu cycles one instruction needs. > * It corresponds to the "perf.cpu_cycles" field in the *Stats APIs. > > To: > > * Macro for typed parameter name that represents cpu_cycles perf event > * describing the total/elapsed cpu cycles. This can be used to measure > * how many cpu cycles one instruction needs. > * It corresponds to the "perf.cpu_cycles" field in the *Stats APIs. > > Or I could just remove the "This can be... " sentence altogether. Since > it's not describing what the data is but how it can be used in > conjunction with the instructions value. I'm OK with both versions, I guess you don't have to remove that part, it's nice to have that example how it can be used. Pavel
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list