Clark,
>> [..]
>> Here is my proposal:
>> Do not change the meaning of existing options. Introduce a new option
>> that is mutual exclusive with the -a, the -t and the -d option. This new
>> option does the same as -a and -t and -d0 and sets the same priority to
>> all threads. How about that?
> Ugh, I truly *hate* adding options. Do you know that cyclictest is
> halfway to having as many options as 'ls'?
Well, yes, we have the choice between two bad things, breaking
compatibility or adding another option. I prefer the latter.
> [..]
> How about if we create the -S/--smp option that takes no arguments and
> causes -a, -t and -d to be ignored (with a warning). This option would
> create one thread per cpu, each thread pinned to it's corresponding
> cpu, all with the same sampling interval (i.e. -d0) and the same
> priority?
Sounds good to me.
May I ask you to also include the -n option which is almost always
needed? This would then give:
-S --smp Standard SMP testing (equals -a -t -n -d0),
same priority on all threads.
Carsten.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
