On 03/02/2021 11:00, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2021-02-03 10:31:04)
On 01/02/2021 12:07, Chris Wilson wrote:
Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2021-02-01 11:57:56)
From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxx>
Slight improvement with regards to wrapping header components to fit
console width. If a single element is wider than max it can still
overflow but it should now work better for practical console widths.
<----
intel-gpu-top: Intel Kabylake (Gen9) @ /dev/dri/card0
900/ 949 MHz; 0% RC6; 6.97/18.42 W; 2 irqs/s
IMC reads: 6 MiB/s
IMC writes: 0 MiB/s
---->
intel-gpu-top: Intel Kabylake (Gen9) @ /dev/dri/card0 - 903/ 954 MHz; 0% RC6
7.16/18.40 W; 14 irqs/s
IMC reads: 80 MiB/s
IMC writes: 0 MiB/s
I thought it looked reasonably tidy, without adding any lines to the
header.
Or on a wider terminal:
<----
intel-gpu-top: Intel Skylake (Gen9) @ /dev/dri/card0
0/ 0 MHz; 100% RC6; 0.00/ 1.29 W; 0 irqs/s
IMC reads: 138 MiB/s
IMC writes: 6 MiB/s
--->
intel-gpu-top: Intel Skylake (Gen9) @ /dev/dri/card0 - 0/ 0 MHz; 100% RC6; 0.00/ 0.00 W; 0 irqs/s
IMC reads: 77 MiB/s
IMC writes: 4 MiB/s
So a "fight" between 80 chars vs 120 (or so). :) It may be a bit of an over-engineered solution but I don't like the wrap on a wide terminal, plus I like an extra blank line.
But the memory counters are visually similar to the
frequency/rc6/power/interrupts...
But I broke my layout by accident when rebasing client stats... ;D
Regards,
Tvrtko
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
