Re: [PATCH 2/3] chainlint.pl: fix incorrect CPU count on Linux SPARC
- From
Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
- Date
- May 22, 2024, 19:11 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAPig+cTxMTAf85Gyi5eEYAM4pOTq2UTD1=oCVBy1q8aSF3cn6Q@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqh6ep4qoy.fsf@gitster.g>
On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 3:00 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 16 quoted lines
> Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes: > >> > > "CPUnn:" in /proc/cpuinfo instead of the usual "processor NN:". > >> > > >> > not sure if worth a reroll, but the "usual" syntax is "processor : NN" > > ... > > Inclusion of the word "usual" is such a minor flaw in the commit > > message that I doubt it warrants a reroll and the associated cost on > > reviewers and on the maintainer (Junio), especially since it does not > > negatively impact the intent conveyed by the commit messages nor the > > correctness of the actual patch. > > > > As such, I'm not worried about it. Whether Junio reads this and wants > > to correct it in his tree is up to him, of course. > > I think "usual" is not what was pointed out. The order between the > colon and NN is.
Yes, I understood that, but it is the word "usual" which makes the text "processor NN:" questionable since "processor NN:" is not typical. Without the word "usual", stating "processor NN:" is not especially problematic since the existing regex (which is being changed by this patch) _does_ match "processor NN:" (among others such as "processor:").
If we want to be more accurate, better wording might be:
On SPARC systems running Linux, individual processors are denoted
with "CPUnn:" in /proc/cpuinfo, however, the regexp in ncores()
matches only "processor:" or "processor NN:". As a result, no
processors are found on SPARC. Address this shortcoming by
extending the regexp to also match lines with "CPUnn:".but I doubt it is worth a reroll.