Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964934AbVIEXNe (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Sep 2005 19:13:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964935AbVIEXNe (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Sep 2005 19:13:34 -0400 Received: from ppp-217-133-42-200.cust-adsl.tiscali.it ([217.133.42.200]:25160 "EHLO g5.random") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964934AbVIEXNd (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Sep 2005 19:13:33 -0400 Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 01:13:12 +0200 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Marc Giger Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, klive@cpushare.com Subject: Re: KLive: Linux Kernel Live Usage Monitor Message-ID: <20050905231312.GI5606@g5.random> References: <20050830030959.GC8515@g5.random> <20050906000507.5c0a1c9f@vaio.gigerstyle.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050906000507.5c0a1c9f@vaio.gigerstyle.ch> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1945 Lines: 54 On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 12:05:07AM +0200, Marc Giger wrote: > Hi Andrea > > Two little details: > > The following line does not print what you expect on > alpha's: > > MHZ = int(re.search(r' (\d+)\.?\d?', > os.popen("grep -i mhz /proc/cpuinfo | head -n > 1").read()).group(1)) Thanks for reminding me about it ;) > Second, you should mention somewhere that it needs at minimum twisted > 1.3.0 to work correctly, did you? I didn't, I actually hoped it would work with older twisted too ;) > Oh, another point: > Some of my machines have long uptimes, and I won't it reboot > to just match the klive runtime. So the reported uptime > is (in my cases) far away from true. You don't need to reboot them, however I can't trust past uptimes or it would be way too easy to fake the results (it's still easy but it takes a lot more effort). > It is very interesting to see how often a vanilla/-git/-mm etc kernel is > tested. [..] This is the objective yes. > [..]. Perhaps klive could be extended to automatically report oopses > and/or other troubles if possible. What abut reporting core features > which are used on the machine like fs, scheduler, raid, lvm etc, so > that the devs can see which subsystem got a lot testing and what is > not used much? So it sounds like the next thing to do is to extend the protocol to add an _optional_ reporting of more info on the subsystems and hardware involved (turned off by default). About the oopses that will require kernel changes, and as per previous emails that'd be a very interesting feature to enable optionally too (via sysctl etc..). The old protocol (number 0) will stay, infact that will remain the default. Thanks. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/