Re: [RFC] [rt-tests] change to cyclictest behavior

Clark Williams
2010-01-06T22:28:22Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1350 bytes --]

On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 23:24:17 +0100
Carsten Emde <Carsten.Emde@osadl.org> wrote:

> 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.

Ok, I yield() :)

> > [..]
> > 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.

Yeah, you read my mind. How about -m (mlockall) as well?

Clark

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]