Spec URL: http://michich.fedorapeople.org/latencytop/latencytop.spec SRPM URL: http://michich.fedorapeople.org/latencytop/latencytop-0.3-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: LatencyTOP is a tool for software developers (both kernel and userspace), aimed at identifying where in the system latency is happening, and what kind of operation/action is causing the latency to happen so that the code can be changed to avoid the worst latency hiccups.
The package builds successfully in mock on my x86_64 system. $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-x86_64/result/ latencytop.x86_64: W: no-documentation This is expected. Upstream tarball contains no documentation.
The issue I see with this package on F8 machine when tried to run latencytop => Please enable the CONFIG_LATENCYTOP configuration in your kernel. Exiting... Is CONFIG_LATENCYTOP is enabled in newer builds of kernel. If not then how can one test functionality of this package? About Packaging issues => 1)Better recreate latencytop-standard-cflags.patch that will remove unnecessary space caught in last few lines of patch. 2) Try to ask upstream to include some README and COPYING file. If this will take some time then ask them to include it in next release. Note :- This is not a blocker for review
CONFIG_LATENCYTOP is a very new feature merged into Linux after 2.6.24 was released. Currently one has to run a self-built kernel from Linus's git tree to use it. I'll fix issue #1 and contact upstream about #2.
waiting for your updated SRPM
I updated the package: http://michich.fedorapeople.org/latencytop/latencytop.spec http://michich.fedorapeople.org/latencytop/latencytop-0.3-2.fc9.src.rpm ad 1) latencytop-standard-cflags.patch now removes the extra whitespace. ad 2) Arjan van de Ven agreed to provide the COPYING file in the future. I noticed another problem with the program. Targeted SELinux policy denies write access to /proc/*/{sched,latency} even to unconfined_t processes. I'll file a bug in the policy and see what Dan Walsh thinks.
I filed bug 431221 for the SELinux policy issue.
(In reply to comment #5) > I updated the package: > http://michich.fedorapeople.org/latencytop/latencytop.spec > http://michich.fedorapeople.org/latencytop/latencytop-0.3-2.fc9.src.rpm > > ad 1) latencytop-standard-cflags.patch now removes the extra whitespace. Can't see this fixed in new SRPM.
Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide). + rpmlint on for SRPM and RPM. latencytop.i386: W: no-documentation + source files match upstream. 3ed2878fb7772e2a500ec71aa01abbb2 latencytop-0.3.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in source code. - %doc files NOT present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Compiler flags used correctly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code. + no static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage exists. + no .la files. + no translations are available. + Does owns the directories it creates. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no scriptlets are used. + Not a GUI app. SHHOULD: 1)Better recreate latencytop-standard-cflags.patch that will remove unnecessary space caught in last few lines of patch. 2)Try to ask upstream to include some README where it should be written what this tool does and what are its limitations like this works on kernel >= 2.6.24 3) Hope to see upstream will include license file in next upstream release. APPROVED.
Can you tell me how can I test this on rawhide?
re 1) We must have a misunderstanding about what whitespace you meant. I thought you referred to the extra line. Maybe you wanted me to drop the second hunk of the patch completely? re 2 and 3) I agree it would be nice if upstream provided a README. I already asked for one when I was asking for the COPYING file. We'll see if a new upstream version adds them. I can see Rawhide has kernel-2.6.24-9 currently. This kernel does not have LATENCYTOP support yet. The patch was merged upstream after the release of 2.6.24 in git commit 9745512ce... "sched: latencytop support". So you'd need to compile the kernel from the current git tree. Make sure you have CONFIG_LATENCYTOP enabled. After boot, start the measurement with: echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/latencytop Then you can run latencytop and see the output similar to the screenshot at http://www.latencytop.org/ .
(In reply to comment #10) > re 1) We must have a misunderstanding about what whitespace you meant. I thought > you referred to the extra line. Maybe you wanted me to drop the second hunk of > the patch completely? Yes. I mean following lines from patch to be removed ============================================================================= # # The w in -lncursesw is not a typo; it is the wide-character version @@ -10,8 +10,7 @@ LDF = -Wl,--as-needed `pkg-config --libs # libncursesw5-dev package. # latencytop: latencytop.o display.o latencytop.h translate.o Makefile - gcc $(CFLAGS) latencytop.o display.o translate.o $(LDF)-o latencytop - + gcc $(CFLAGS) latencytop.o display.o translate.o $(LDF) -o latencytop clean: rm -f *~ latencytop DEADJOE *.o ========================================================================= > > re 2 and 3) I agree it would be nice if upstream provided a README. I already > asked for one when I was asking for the COPYING file. We'll see if a new > upstream version adds them. Thanks. > > > I can see Rawhide has kernel-2.6.24-9 currently. This kernel does not have > LATENCYTOP support yet. The patch was merged upstream after the release of > 2.6.24 in git commit 9745512ce... "sched: latencytop support". > So you'd need to compile the kernel from the current git tree. Make sure you > have CONFIG_LATENCYTOP enabled. After boot, start the measurement with: > echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/latencytop > Then you can run latencytop and see the output similar to the screenshot at > http://www.latencytop.org/ . Hope to see our kernels will get compiled with CONFIG_LATENCYTOP enabled.
Alright, I removed the second part of the patch. Now it's just a one-liner changing the CFLAGS. Updated package: http://michich.fedorapeople.org/latencytop/latencytop-0.3-3.fc9.src.rpm http://michich.fedorapeople.org/latencytop/latencytop.spec Rawhide kernels usually do have many debugging options enabled. I expect LATENCYTOP will be enabled too. Thank you for the review. New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: latencytop Short Description: System latency monitor Owners: michich Branches: F-8 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes
cvs done.
Closing this as this package has been successfully built for all requested branches on build server.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: latencytop New Branches: EL-4 EL-5 Owners: michich
Jeremy, please explain what you mean by the request. Are you willing to maintain the package in the new branches or do you expect me to do it? I have doubts about the usefulness of latencytop in EL-4 and EL-5 because their kernel do not have latencytop support.