It's queued in my tree and will be merged shortly.
Thanks!
On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 09:55:59AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> Ping?
>
> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 03:41:33PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > Michael,
> >
> > Any updates on this?
> >
> > On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 01:15:50PM +0300, Mike R
Ping?
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 03:41:33PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> Michael,
>
> Any updates on this?
>
> On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 01:15:50PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > /dev/cpu is only available on x86 with certain modules (e.g. msr) enabled.
> > Using lscpu to get processors count is mo
Michael,
Any updates on this?
On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 01:15:50PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> /dev/cpu is only available on x86 with certain modules (e.g. msr) enabled.
> Using lscpu to get processors count is more portable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport
> ---
> v3: simplify by using lscpu
On Wed, 4 May 2016 13:15:50 +0300
Mike Rapoport wrote:
> /dev/cpu is only available on x86 with certain modules (e.g. msr) enabled.
> Using lscpu to get processors count is more portable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport
> ---
> v3: simplify by using lscpu -p=cpu
> v2: use lspcu instead of /p
/dev/cpu is only available on x86 with certain modules (e.g. msr) enabled.
Using lscpu to get processors count is more portable.
Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport
---
v3: simplify by using lscpu -p=cpu
v2: use lspcu instead of /proc/cpuinfo as per Cornelia's suggestion
tools/virtio/ringtest/run-on-
