On 2021-01-14 12:55, Mathias Kresin wrote:
1/13/21 3:00 PM, Martin Schiller:
On 2021-01-09 09:40, Andre Heider wrote:
Hi,
(cc'ed some recent commiters for lantiq)
On 15/12/2020 10:35, Andre Heider wrote:
v2:
- drop 0002-ltq-vdsl-app-fix-Wundef-warnings.patch
- use "/dev/dsl_cpe_api" without the "0" suffix for the adsl daemon:
package/kernel/lantiq/ltq-adsl/patches/100-dsl_compat.patch:+
device_create(dsl_class, NULL, MKDEV(DRV_DSL_CPE_API_DEV_MAJOR, 0),
NULL, "dsl_cpe_api");
package/kernel/lantiq/ltq-vdsl/patches/100-compat.patch:+
device_create(dsl_class, NULL, dsl_devt, NULL, "dsl_cpe_api0");
- use callDSLMetrics() for luci, per jo
- add Tested-by tags
This is to significantly speed up the generation of the metrics.
The motivation comes from the fact that ~2.6s is just way too
ineffcient for interval based metric collectors like prometheus or
collectd.
The luci status page also loads/refreshes alot faster.
$ time /etc/init.d/dsl_control dslstat
real 0m 2.66s
user 0m 0.90s
sys 0m 1.76s
$ time ubus call dsl metrics
real 0m 0.02s
user 0m 0.00s
sys 0m 0.01s
The ltq-adsl-app changes are only compile time tested.
who do I need to convince to review this? ;)
I would also like this great work to be merged.
Martin
Sending a reviewed-by and/or tested-by (with devices it was tested on)
might help to push this forward.
OK.
I've successfully tested the following parts of this patchset (v2) on
our (TDT) xrx200 based systems:
[01/13] ltq-vdsl-app: shutdown upon sigterm
[02/12] ltq-vdsl-app: add ubus support to get metrics
[04/12] luci-mod-status: use the new ubus dsl metrics
[05/12] rpcd-mod-luci: get rid of now unused getDSLStatus ubus rpc
[07/12] ltq-vdsl-app: use ubus to provide metrics
[09/12] ltq-dsl-base: remove usused lantiq_dsl.sh
[10/12] ltq-dsl-base: bump PKG_RELEASE
[11/12] ltq-vdsl-app: bump PKG_RELEASE
I am not able to test the ltq-adsl (Danube etc.) stuff.
Tested-by: Martin Schiller <m...@dev.tdt.de>
It is also important to note that the output of dslstat has changed
completely and lucistat no longer exists. If someone has processed the
output directly, it must be reworked.
Regards,
Martin
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
