Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 11 Mar 2014 13:48:28 +0000 | From | Dietmar Eggemann <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/6] sched: rework of sched_domain topology definition |
| |
On 11/03/14 13:27, Vincent Guittot wrote: > On 11 March 2014 11:31, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 04:32:35PM +0800, Vincent Guittot wrote: >>>> Never got the new name DIE for CPU? Might confuse people when they use >>>> /proc/sys/kernel/sched_domain/cpuX/domainY/name or sched_domain_debug_one(). >>> >>> In fact, CPU is also confusing because it's used for different things. >>> But if it makes things even more confusing, i can come back to CPU >> >> Yeah, not sure DIE is the right thing either; because there's multi-die >> packages that get classified under CPU :-) >> >> Take for example the Core 2 Quad, which was 2 dual core dies glued >> together in a single package. >> >> There's also the AMD bulldozer which glued two dies into a single >> package; but for those its not a problem because each die is a separate >> numa node, so there DIE would actually be the correct term and PACKAGE >> would be wrong. >> >> So while CPU sucks, I'm not sure we can come up with anything that's >> actually correct. That said; we could try for something less wrong than >> CPU :-) > > OK > > Dietmar, > > Have you got another naming that DIE that could suit better ? > otherwise i will keep it
If backward compatibility is not an issue here, keep it.
-- Dietmar
> > Vincent > >> >> I'm not sure there are a lot of people who see/know the names of these >> domains to be bothered by a change in them; it might be limited to just >> us for all I know. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-arm-kernel mailing list >> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel >
| |