Dave, On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 5:16 AM, Dave Shield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So we're really just reporting the contents of /proc/stat
Ah, excellent, thank you. > > How about Solaris? > cpu2->sys2_ticks = (unsigned > long)cpu2->kern_ticks+cpu2->wait_ticks; > Note that system here is kernel + wait. Doh :). > This inconsistency is partly why I would like to define a new CPU MIB. > That and a desire to support per-CPU statistics, rather than just the > current overall figures. Makes sense and a very good idea; especially with HT and multi-cores having this information in a table now would make a lot of sense. I am sure that presenting the information in a consistent way across platforms will be a challenge, are you also planning on removing the platform-specific summing from the values reported (like the Solaris example above) so that SNMP users don't have to get into the guts of each OS to make CPU utilization checking programs behave properly for each platform Net-SNMP is used on? I say that knowing that you have no control over how / if any OS does it's own math on the counters before presenting them to users ... I know a Im revisiting a problem that has been around for a long time, I appreciate the information. > The clearest code is probably that under 'mibgroup/hardware/cpu', > where there's a separate code file for each architecture. See the > routine 'netsnmp_cpu_arch_load'. > The contents of these are basically the same as those from the > earlier 'mibgroup/ucd-snmp/vmstat*.c' files. Thank you very much! - Max ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-users mailing list Net-snmp-users@lists.sourceforge.net Please see the following page to unsubscribe or change other options: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-users
