On Thu, 7 Mar 2019, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 07:53:58PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 01:19:58AM -0500, Len Brown wrote: > > > Added sysfs core_threads, core_threads_list > > > > > > Added this attribute to show which threads siblings in a core. > > > Exactly same as "thread_siblings", a name now deprecated. > > > This attribute name and definition is immune to future > > > topology changes. > > > > > > Suggested by Brice. > > > > I think I prefer 's/threads/cpus/g' on that. Threads makes me think SMT, > > and I don't think there's any guarantee the part in question will have > > SMT on. > > I think 'threads' is a bit confusing as well. We seem to be using 'cpu' > everywhere for something we can schedule tasks on, including the sysfs > /sys/devices/system/cpu/ subdirs for each SMT thread on SMT systems. > > Another thing that I find confusing is that with this series we a new > die id/mask which is totally unrelated to the DIE level in the > sched_domain hierarchy. We should rename DIE level to something that > reflects what it really is. If we can agree on that ;-) > > NODE level?
Any conclusions here?
