Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 01 Sep 1999 08:51:24 -0600 (MDT) | From | Brian Hall <> | Subject | Re: /proc/cpuinfo verbiage differ unnecessarily between ports... |
| |
Actually, I am writing a tool that DOES parse /proc/cpuinfo, and it is somewhat irritating for it to vary across platforms. Easily handled with a case statement, but it would be a nice touch if the information was standardized for the 2.4 kernel.
Jes Sorensen writes: >Since none of the info in /proc/cpuinfo should be of interest to any >tools it should be fairly irrelevant. It's been different since the >first days of the /proc filesystem and never caused problems before.
I don't consider that a good argument... But that may be just me. I mean, why shouldn't /proc/cpuinfo be of any interest to any tools? It may be that it isn't because it can't be parsed in a portable manner. There is information in there that isn't available in /proc/stat.
But since /proc/stat calls that chip in the big socket a "cpu", I'd at least consider changing the string in the i386 /proc/cpuinfo from "processor" to "cpu". I haven't checked to see if the other ports use something other than "cpu", though.
Anyway, this is just a pedantic thing. After all, if no tools use it, it shouldn't hurt to change it and make it consistent, now would it?
-- Brian Hall <brianw.hall@compaq.com> Linux Consultant
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |