On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:17:24AM -0400, Jon Stanley wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 5:10 AM, Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure if the currently used extra separators (,,) for the
> > caches is a good idea. Maybe it would be better to force people to
> > parse the last comment line where is the header for the columns.
>
> Speaking as a user of lscpu, I think that forcing people to parse the
> last comment line is not a particularly good idea - no one is used to
> doing it, and I'm not sure of any other utility that forces you to
> parse it's "machine-readable" output. Stability of this format is key.
Yes, -p sucks ;-)
> > The ideal solution is to extend the "-p" functionality and allow to
> > specify expected columns at command line, something like:
> >
> > lscpu -p -o cpu,core,book,socket
>
> I think that this is the only long-term supportable way to do this.
> CPU architectures (even in the x86 world that I'm interested in) ARE
> going to change and evolve. Heck, it's even possible that concepts
> like the hypervisor scheduling parameters that you mentioned on s390
> could eventually make their way down to x86 virtualization, and
> exposing stuff like that in lscpu would be nice.
I'll try to add this functionality in next days.
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
