Re: PROPOSAL: /proc standards (was dot-proc interface [was: /proc

From: Erik Andersen (andersen@codepoet.org)
Date: Tue Nov 06 2001 - 17:42:40 EST


On Tue Nov 06, 2001 at 11:33:49PM +0100, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> On Tue, 2001-11-06 15:28:26 -0700, Erik Andersen <andersen@codepoet.org>
> wrote in message <20011106152826.C31923@codepoet.org>:
> > On Tue Nov 06, 2001 at 07:24:13PM -0200, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > > PROCESSOR=0
> > > VENDOR_ID=GenuineIntel
> > > CPU_FAMILY=6
> > > MODEL=6
> > > MODEL_NAME="Celeron (Mendocino)"
> > > .....
>
> PROCESSOR=1
> ...
>
> > > . /proc/cpuinfo
> >
> > I think we have a winner! If we could establish this
> > as policy that would be _sweet_!
>
> What do you expect on a SMP system?

How about something like:
NUMBER_CPUS=8
VENDOR_ID_0=GenuineIntel
CPU_FAMILY_0=6
MODEL_0=6
MODEL_NAME_0="Celeron (Mendocino)"
...

 -Erik

--
Erik B. Andersen             http://codepoet-consulting.com/
--This message was written using 73% post-consumer electrons--
-
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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 07 2001 - 21:00:32 EST