From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Emde Subject: Re: [RFC] [rt-tests] change to cyclictest behavior Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 23:24:17 +0100 Message-ID: <4B450D91.7060403@osadl.org> References: <20100106130400.7f30ae55@torg> <520f0cf11001061139j2af13403qfcbf567647bdfaa8@mail.gmail.com> <4B4502FD.1000404@osadl.org> <20100106160434.77efc790@torg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: John Kacur , RT , LKML To: Clark Williams Return-path: Received: from toro.web-alm.net ([62.245.132.31]:51940 "EHLO toro.web-alm.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932259Ab0AFWZU (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jan 2010 17:25:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20100106160434.77efc790@torg> Sender: linux-rt-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 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.