Re: [PATCH 2/2] lscpu: fix threads-per-core calculation

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 04:45:40PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >> [Also, remove stray "(s)"s that do not belong there, and properly
> >> declare threads, avoid using "CPU" (which is an overloaded term
> >> meaning either thread, or package/NUMA node).]
> >
> >avoid using "CPU(s)" is not backwardly compatible change :-( 
> 
> Why not? Grepping in output is not very portable - the less so when 
> programs are translated - and I can see why sysfs chose to demand that 
> there be just one value per file.

 Unfortunately, we don't have 

    lscpu --get=<valuename>

 so grep/awk is probably the right way how to parse the output. I think
 this way is pretty unusual in scripts.

    Karel

-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>
 http://karelzak.blogspot.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux