Sorry Phil, Dave and Bill , this mail was misplaced in the bog of eternal
stench (aka my inbox) and was only recently re-discovered ...
With reference to the mail below and the subsequent follow-ups ...
Did all your questions get answered?
Mark, has the patch been rolled into the PCP open source code
base?
And finally have you been able to use PCP on Tru64 in any serious
performance analysis tasks, and if so, do you have any feedback,
comments or suggestions?
Thanks, and apologies again for my tardiness.
On Mon, 27 Aug 2001, Phillip Ezolt wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I've patched the Performance Co-Pilot infrastructure to work
> with Tru64. All of the clients (except for pmstat) that I've tested work.
> The included PMDAs all compile except for cisco and shping.
>
> Known issues:
> 1) cisco and pmdas do not compile. (Missing sys/prctl)
> 2) No test for whether to use "hostname -f" or "hostname".
> 3) Magic file format is not compatible with Tru64.
> 4) Testing for the "runlevel" command is not done properly in
> the shell scripts.
> 5) No Tru64 specific PMDA.
>
> Questions/Comments:
>
> 1) What pmda number should I use for Tru64? (Will 74 work?)
>
> 2) The memory values in the Linux pmda should be 64-bit, not 32-bit.
> Problems show up when a machine has more than 4-gig of memory.
>
> /* mem.util.used */
> { &proc_meminfo.mem[1],
> { PMDA_PMID(CLUSTER_MEMINFO,1), PM_TYPE_U32, PM_INDOM_NULL,
> PM_SEM_INSTANT,
> PMDA_PMUNITS(1,0,0,PM_SPACE_BYTE,0,0) }, },
>
>
> Hopefully, the patch is self explanitory. I had to add some automake
> checks in for things that incorrectly pcp assumed.
>
> If you need me to test or explain anything, just tell me!
|