From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <m.sandoval@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 750F8B180
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Jun 2023 13:34:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5646F3F4DF
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Jun 2023 13:34:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
[94.136.29.106])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Jun 2023 13:34:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7B93D4217A
for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 29 Jun 2023 13:34:24 +0200 (CEST)
From: Maximiliano Sandoval <m.sandoval@proxmox.com>
To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2023 13:34:23 +0200
Message-Id: <20230629113423.18311-1-m.sandoval@proxmox.com>
X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 0.001 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy
KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 -
Subject: [pve-devel] [PATCH container] fix #4765: pct: do not report cpu
usage
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>,
<mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2023 11:34:26 -0000
When running `pct status VMID` the variable
$last_proc_vmid_stat->{$vmid} is not set and pct reports no cpu usage.
For consistency with the qt command we do not print the cpu usage.
Signed-off-by: Maximiliano Sandoval <m.sandoval@proxmox.com>
---
This is a different approach that the one tried at
https://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/2023-June/057771.html.
While we could run the computation twice after a time delta to get *a* number
there are many open questions, like how would a user interpret this value, and
how is this time delta going to be documented, etc.
src/PVE/CLI/pct.pm | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/src/PVE/CLI/pct.pm b/src/PVE/CLI/pct.pm
index ff75d33..a0b9bce 100755
--- a/src/PVE/CLI/pct.pm
+++ b/src/PVE/CLI/pct.pm
@@ -67,6 +67,7 @@ __PACKAGE__->register_method ({
foreach my $k (sort (keys %$stat)) {
my $v = $stat->{$k};
next if !defined($v);
+ next if $k eq 'cpu';
print "$k: $v\n";
}
} else {
--
2.39.2