NUMAGROUP sounds fine to me. Misc appears to be working for me though and I'd like to start shipping hwloc on all our boxes in the next few months.
Samuel Thibault wrote: > Hello, > > Michael Raymond, le Fri 20 Nov 2009 08:43:10 -0600, a écrit : >> In one pattern I might want to place processes on all the Cores in a >> Misc and then move to the next Misc. A topology tree that looks like >> System -> Misc -> Core makes that easy. Having Nodes in there just adds >> unneeded complexity. > > Ok, I see. What I'd see is instead of using the MISC type for numa > groups, introducing a NUMAGROUP object type. In that case, ignoring > NUMA but not NUMAGROUP makes sense and would provide that result. > > However, with a better version of hwloc you may still get > > System -> Numagroup -> Numagroup -> Core > > because e.g. thanks to more precise distances hwloc has noticed that the > first Numagroup level itself is hierarchical, forming another Numagroup > level. > > Introduce several numagroup types? How many? That's not easy to > answer. > > Samuel > _______________________________________________ > hwloc-devel mailing list > hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel -- Michael A. Raymond Message Passing Toolkit Team Silicon Graphics Inc (651) 683-3434
