emacs-bug-tracker
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#39762: closed ([PATCH] gnu: cpuid: Update to 20200211.)


From: GNU bug Tracking System
Subject: bug#39762: closed ([PATCH] gnu: cpuid: Update to 20200211.)
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2020 23:50:02 +0000

Your message dated Mon, 24 Feb 2020 00:49:52 +0100
with message-id <877e0cuan3.fsf@nckx>
and subject line Re: [bug#39762] [PATCH] gnu: cpuid: Update to 20200211.
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #39762,
regarding [PATCH] gnu: cpuid: Update to 20200211.
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
address@hidden.)


-- 
39762: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=39762
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: [PATCH] gnu: cpuid: Update to 20200211. Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2020 23:54:38 +0100
Looks like it is still working in a guix VM running on AMD ryzen 3700X host.

But there is some output differences between previous version and this one.

in raw mode (cpuid -r), it outputs one more line per core:

0x20000000 0x00: eax=0x00000000 ebx=0x00000000 ecx=0x00000000 edx=0x00000000

which is probably OK, looks like the change:
Sun Feb  2 2020 Todd Allen <address@hidden>
        * cpuid.c: Added leaf walking of the 0x20000000 (Intel Phi) range
        [...]

But in normal mode, output changed a lot, some separators changed from ":"
to "=", a lot of reported values, new things... This will probably break
any simplistic parsing of that output, if there is anything doing that in
guix...

Having a cursory look at the changelog, it looks like this is getting a lot
more change since the beginning of this year, or something else.

Maybe Tood Allen can give us a hint...

Guixers, please advise how to proceed further.

Thanks--
Vincent Legoll

Attachment: 0001-gnu-cpuid-Update-to-20200211.patch
Description: Text Data


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: [bug#39762] [PATCH] gnu: cpuid: Update to 20200211. Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 00:49:52 +0100
Vincent,

Thanks for the update! I only recently (this year?) learnt of this readable alternative to /proc/cpuinfo. Glad to hear it's seeing more action.

Vincent Legoll 写道:
But in normal mode, output changed a lot, some separators changed from ":"
to "="

This was deliberate, for consistency:

 Wed Feb  5 2020 Todd Allen <address@hidden>
* cpuid.c: Changed mp_synth fields to use '=' separator instead of ':',
     like every other value.
* cpuid.c: Changed processor serial number to use '=' separator instead
     of ':', like every other value.

a lot of reported values, new things... This will probably break
any simplistic parsing of that output, if there is anything doing that in
guix...

No:

 ~ λ guix refresh -l cpuid
 No dependents other than itself: cpuid@20200116

It's possible there's something out there calling cpuid from $PATH, but…

Guixers, please advise how to proceed further.

…honestly, you're overthinking it. :-) There's a time to be cautious but bumping cpuid is probably not it.

Guix is exceptionally good at installing previous versions of packages for those who disagree. I've pushed your patch as 08fee94d0fd96ea2b40f9fec80dc3fa19e283019.

Subject: [PATCH] gnu: cpuid: Update to 20200211. * gnu/packages/linux.scm
(cpuid): Update to 20200211.

Note that git expects an empty line (newline) between the commit summary and the body of the message:

 gnu: cpuid: Update to 20200211.

 * gnu/packages/linux.scm (cpuid): Update to 20200211.

Thanks again,

T G-R

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


--- End Message ---

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]