lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Aug]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/5 v4] x86: Adapt CPU topology detection for AMD Magny-Cours
Andreas Herrmann wrote:
> Changes to previous patch set:
> - fixed allnoconfig compile error and link error if CONFIG_PCI=n
> - fixed hotplug issue: cpumask of siblings sharing same L3 were not
> properly updated
> - properly allocate cpu_node_map
>
> Current patch set contains 5 patches:
> - patch 1 adapts common code to show cpu_node_id,
> cpu_node_siblings and cpu_node_siblings_list in
> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/topology
> - patch 2 prepares arch/x86 to provide cpu_node information
> - patch 3 sets up cpu_node information for AMD Magny-Cours CPU
> - patch 4 fixes L3 cache information for Magny-Cours
> - patch 5 fixes mcheck code for Magny-Cours
>

Hello Andreas,

Reading your first submission I find something disturbing. You say that
we'll have the following sibling information:

Level | Set of CPUs
--------------|---------------
phys_package | core_siblings
cpu_node | cpu_node_siblings
core | thread_siblings
thread | one CPU


This breaks the existing convention/semantics. Currently
core/thread_siblings contains the cpumask covering *all* siblings of
current core/thread object. What you're adding only shows the cpumask of
current "cpu_node" object in cpu_node_siblings. I don't have any
preference between both semantics, but I think "cpu_node" should use the
semantics that "core" and "thread" do. So the above should be changed into:

Level | Set of CPUs
--------------|---------------
phys_package | cpu_node_siblings
cpu_node | core_siblings
core | thread_siblings
thread | one CPU


Brice



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-08-05 22:27    [W:0.136 / U:0.264 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site