On Tue, 2012-10-23 at 18:43 +0100, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > <...>212.673126: hwmon_attr_update: hwmon4 temp1_input 34361 > > > > One issue with this is that some external knowledge is required to > > relate a number to a processor core. Or maybe it's not an issue at all > > because it should be left for the user(space)? > > If the external knowledge can be characterized in a userspace tool with > the given data here, I see no issues with this. Ok, fine. > > TP_fast_assign( > > memcpy(__entry->cpus, cpus, sizeof(struct cpumask)); > > Copying the entire cpumask seems like overkill. Especially when you have > 4096 CPU machines. Uh, right. I didn't consider such use case... > Perhaps making a field that can be a subset of cpus may be better. That > way we don't waste the ring buffer with lots of zeros. I'm guessing that > it will only be a group of cpus, and not a scattered list? Of course, > I've seen boxes where the cpu numbers went from core to core. That is, > cpu 0 was on core 1, cpu 1 was on core 2, and then it would repeat. > cpu 8 was on core 1, cpu 9 was on core 2, etc. > > But still, this could be compressed somehow. Sure thing. Or I could simply use cpumask_scnprintf() on the assign stage and keep an already-formatted string. Or, as the cpumask per sensor would be de-facto constant, I could assume keep only a pointer to it. Will keep it in mind if this event was supposed to happen. Thanks! Paweł _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
