Samuel Thibault wrote: >> I guess what we called "Fake" or "Misc" has evolved a bit. In the >> beginning, it was more some "strange" stuff that could be ignored if it >> didn't bring any new structure. Now it's more about "misc" stuff for real. >> > > Mmm, well, the code hasn't changed, now I remember: the issue is with > AIX, which does still report a lot of strange stuff. Maybe the AIX > backend should tell which objects could be dropped instead of the > converse. >
IIRC, you said in the past we could have a special type for "groups" of objects, especially NUMA groups generated from distances. Maybe we could indeed add a "Group" type for this special case and for strange objects that some OS add. Those could be ignored by default when they don't bring any structure. The only purpose of these objects is to add more structure to the topology. Then keep "Misc" for really "misc" stuff that we don't want to ignore by default anyhow (user-defined annotations, ...) since those bring information without structure. Brice
