FWIW: I just pushed a change that makes the devel-map output match the report-bindings output format so we reduce confusion.
HTH Ralph > On Apr 23, 2015, at 4:29 AM, Elena Elkina <elena.elk...@itseez.com> wrote: > > Thanks guys, you're right. > > This is an output of lstopo on our system which confirms that logical cpus > numbering is used in report bindings: > lstopo -l > Machine (256GB) > NUMANode L#0 (P#0 128GB) + Socket L#0 + L3 L#0 (35MB) > L2 L#0 (256KB) + L1 L#0 (32KB) + Core L#0 + PU L#0 (P#0) > L2 L#1 (256KB) + L1 L#1 (32KB) + Core L#1 + PU L#1 (P#1) > L2 L#2 (256KB) + L1 L#2 (32KB) + Core L#2 + PU L#2 (P#2) > L2 L#3 (256KB) + L1 L#3 (32KB) + Core L#3 + PU L#3 (P#3) > L2 L#4 (256KB) + L1 L#4 (32KB) + Core L#4 + PU L#4 (P#4) > L2 L#5 (256KB) + L1 L#5 (32KB) + Core L#5 + PU L#5 (P#5) > L2 L#6 (256KB) + L1 L#6 (32KB) + Core L#6 + PU L#6 (P#6) > L2 L#7 (256KB) + L1 L#7 (32KB) + Core L#7 + PU L#7 (P#14) > L2 L#8 (256KB) + L1 L#8 (32KB) + Core L#8 + PU L#8 (P#15) > L2 L#9 (256KB) + L1 L#9 (32KB) + Core L#9 + PU L#9 (P#16) > L2 L#10 (256KB) + L1 L#10 (32KB) + Core L#10 + PU L#10 (P#17) > L2 L#11 (256KB) + L1 L#11 (32KB) + Core L#11 + PU L#11 (P#18) > L2 L#12 (256KB) + L1 L#12 (32KB) + Core L#12 + PU L#12 (P#19) > L2 L#13 (256KB) + L1 L#13 (32KB) + Core L#13 + PU L#13 (P#20) > NUMANode L#1 (P#1 128GB) + Socket L#1 + L3 L#1 (35MB) > L2 L#14 (256KB) + L1 L#14 (32KB) + Core L#14 + PU L#14 (P#7) > L2 L#15 (256KB) + L1 L#15 (32KB) + Core L#15 + PU L#15 (P#8) > L2 L#16 (256KB) + L1 L#16 (32KB) + Core L#16 + PU L#16 (P#9) > L2 L#17 (256KB) + L1 L#17 (32KB) + Core L#17 + PU L#17 (P#10) > L2 L#18 (256KB) + L1 L#18 (32KB) + Core L#18 + PU L#18 (P#11) > L2 L#19 (256KB) + L1 L#19 (32KB) + Core L#19 + PU L#19 (P#12) > L2 L#20 (256KB) + L1 L#20 (32KB) + Core L#20 + PU L#20 (P#13) > L2 L#21 (256KB) + L1 L#21 (32KB) + Core L#21 + PU L#21 (P#21) > L2 L#22 (256KB) + L1 L#22 (32KB) + Core L#22 + PU L#22 (P#22) > L2 L#23 (256KB) + L1 L#23 (32KB) + Core L#23 + PU L#23 (P#23) > L2 L#24 (256KB) + L1 L#24 (32KB) + Core L#24 + PU L#24 (P#24) > L2 L#25 (256KB) + L1 L#25 (32KB) + Core L#25 + PU L#25 (P#25) > L2 L#26 (256KB) + L1 L#26 (32KB) + Core L#26 + PU L#26 (P#26) > L2 L#27 (256KB) + L1 L#27 (32KB) + Core L#27 + PU L#27 (P#27) > > > Best regards, > Elena > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquy...@cisco.com > <mailto:jsquy...@cisco.com>> wrote: > On Apr 22, 2015, at 11:13 PM, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org > <mailto:r...@open-mpi.org>> wrote: > > > > <shrug> every bios does it differently, so there is no way to provide a > > standardized output. This is why we have report-bindings to tell the user > > where they actually wound up. > > Maybe we should label the --display-devel-map with "P" to indicate that the > numbers shown are physical? E.g.: > > State: INITIALIZED Restarts: 0 App_context: 0 Locale: > P0,P12 Bind location: P0,P12 Binding: P0,P12 > > (I was liberal in the application of P -- I *think* it belongs in all 6 > places, but am not 100% sure) > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquy...@cisco.com <mailto:jsquy...@cisco.com> > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > <http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/> > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org <mailto:de...@open-mpi.org> > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel > <http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel> > Link to this post: > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2015/04/17339.php > <http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2015/04/17339.php> > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel > Link to this post: > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2015/04/17340.php
