From: Sedat Dilek Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests-bld: Simplify determination of number of CPUs in build-all Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 11:04:51 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1395997399-3000-1-git-send-email-sedat.dilek@gmail.com> <20140328161806.GA31772@thunk.org> Reply-To: sedat.dilek@gmail.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: lsf@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel , Ext4 Developers List To: "Theodore Ts'o" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140328161806.GA31772@thunk.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 5:18 PM, wrote: > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 10:03:19AM +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> Use 'getconf _NPROCESSORS_ONLN' to determine the total number >> of available ("online") CPUs. >> >> I have seen this 1st in some build-scripts of Grml project and >> had some discussions with Thorsten Glaser on this topic. >> >> Signed-off-by: Sedat Dilek > > Thanks, applied. > ...and pushed? > In the future, it would be great at least cc patches to > linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, since I rely on patchwork to make sure > patches don't end up falling through the cracks. > > If we start getting a huge number of patches to xfstests-bld, and > people start getting confused/annoyed about how xfstests-bld issues > get discussed on linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, while xfstests patches > and discussion happen on xfs@oss.sgi.com, we could consider creating a > new mailing list --- especially given that based on a challenge which > Greg K-H gave us at the kernel pannel at Collab Summit, we'll at least > be looking at cleaning up and then trying to get into the linux kernel > mainline sources some combination of xfstests plus some infrastructure > automation (perhaps strongly based on what I've been working here in > the xfstests-bld tree) to run xfstests. > Please, document the handling of patches (and where someone can get informed). - Sedat -