Alexander Kolbasov <akolb at eng.sun.com> writes: > Hello, > > I would like to propose a new "CPUfs" project aimed at providing > extended observability for the CPUs in the system and their sharing > relationships. The main objective is to provide stable infrastructure > for representing CPU properties for user-land applications. > > Currently some CPU-related information can be obtained using > prtconf(1M) and psrinfo(1M) which just a wrapper around the kstat (1M) > framework. The kstat framework is usable for representing simple > "flat" CPU properties, but using it becomes more and more of a stretch > in the CMT world. > > The purpose of the CPUfs project is to explore using the file system > abstraction to represent CPU properties. File system abstraction > supports hierarchy and convenient name space. > > I suggest hosting the project under either Observability or > Performance community. >
While I agree that greater observability here is desirable, it'd be good to see some rational as to why kstat can't provide it, and, beyond that, why a pseudo-fs is the better choice. lgrps form a nice, pleasant, tree. PGs seem to bring a more complex hierarchy, given the number of possible relationships they represent, but I'm not immediately seeing how a pseudo-fs makes that more pleasant than kstat (given the filesystem would, I suppose, be presenting it as that same "nice, pleasant, tree", almost by definition). -- Rich
