On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 04:42:32PM +0000, Duran, Leo wrote:
First of all, please do not top-post.
> Are you saying that "amd.c' should be scheduler-aware?.. Really?
Please read again what I said.
> If so, are you saying that information returned by kernel-defined
> terms like 'Package', 'Core',
"information returned by kernel-defined terms"... hmmm, I don't know
what that means.
> etc, should done in the context of understanding the scheduler, rather
> than in the context what is being documented for those terms to
> actually mean or represent.
-ENOPARSE.
> I'd hope that "amd.c" should be doing the latter... and that perhaps
> we're simply not returning information as specified by the intended
> definition of those terms (in which case we need to fix our code)
-ENOPARSE.
I can't really understand what you're trying to tell me here.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
