> Quoting Christian Brauner (christianvanbrauner at gmail.com):
> >
> > > > +else if (sscanf(cpu_char, "%d", &cpu) != 1) {
> > >
> > > This is an unorthodox (for lxc) coding style. Could you explain
> > > exactly what you're doing here? I would expect just:
> > >
> > > if (sscanf(
Quoting Christian Brauner (christianvanbrau...@gmail.com):
>
> > > +else if (sscanf(cpu_char, "%d", &cpu) != 1) {
> >
> > This is an unorthodox (for lxc) coding style. Could you explain
> > exactly what you're doing here? I would expect just:
> >
> > if (sscanf(cpu_char, "%d", &cpu
> > +else if (sscanf(cpu_char, "%d", &cpu) != 1) {
>
> This is an unorthodox (for lxc) coding style. Could you explain
> exactly what you're doing here? I would expect just:
>
> if (sscanf(cpu_char, "%d", &cpu) != 1))
> continue;
> if (!cpu_in_cpuset(cpu, cpuset))
>
Quoting Christian Brauner (christianvanbrau...@gmail.com):
> Hello,
>
> /proc/stat mounted at /var/lib/lxcfs/ is currently missing
> (a) the cpu average-line from the hosts /proc/stat
> and
> (b) the numbering of the cores starts with 1 and not with the 0.
> (This will e.g. cause confusion for to
Hello,
/proc/stat mounted at /var/lib/lxcfs/ is currently missing
(a) the cpu average-line from the hosts /proc/stat
and
(b) the numbering of the cores starts with 1 and not with the 0.
(This will e.g. cause confusion for top/htop in the container.) I wrote a
minimally invasive patch for that:
S
