On 12 March 2015 at 11:34, Taras Kondratiuk <taras.kondrat...@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 03/12/2015 12:03 PM, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote: > >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >>> From: ext Taras Kondratiuk [mailto:taras.kondrat...@linaro.org] >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 5:18 PM >>> To: Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo); ext Christophe Milard; lng- >>> o...@lists.linaro.org >>> Subject: Re: [lng-odp] odp_cpu_count() vs odp_cpumask size >>> >>> On 03/11/2015 04:46 PM, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) wrote: >>> >>>> Continuation of cpumask discussion on the call... For creating arbitrary >>>> masks (e.g. fill in a mask with CPU ids of another ODP program in the >>>> system, or testing all possible mask bits), we may need two more calls: >>>> >>>> /** >>>> >>>> * @return Maximum number of CPUs a mask can hold >>>> >>>> */ >>>> >>>> int odp_cpumask_max_cpus(void) >>>> >>>> /** >>>> >>>> * Set all CPUs in the mask >>>> >>>> * >>>> >>>> * After the call, the mask has odp_cpumask_max_cpus() CPUs set. >>>> >>>> * @note CPU numbering may not be contiguous. >>>> >>>> */ >>>> >>>> void odp_cpumask_setall(odp_cpumask_t *mask) >>>> >>>> -Petri >>>> >>>> *From:*lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org >>>> [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] *On Behalf Of *ext >>>> Savolainen, >>>> Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) >>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 11, 2015 2:09 PM >>>> *To:* ext Christophe Milard; lng-odp@lists.linaro.org >>>> *Subject:* Re: [lng-odp] odp_cpu_count() vs odp_cpumask size >>>> >>>> Actually, this is equal to odp_cpu_max(): >>>> >>>> odp_cpumask_t mask; >>>> >>>> odp_cpu_mask(&mask) >>>> >>>> odp_cpumask_last(&mask) >>>> >>>> So maybe odp_cpu_mask() is only new thing we need. >>>> >>> >>> Hi Petri >>> >>> It is not clear to me why do we need odp_cpu_* and odp_cpumask_* API. >>> >>> They are used now to create threads and set CPU affinity. But this is >>> done by ODP helpers, because it is out of ODP scope. Shouldn't 'cpu' and >>> 'cpumask' be a part of helpers too? >>> >> >> The original idea was to use cpumask in definition of >> odp_schedule_group_t (still on todo list). I need go through that use case >> and see if e.g. a thread mask would work instead. >> > > Currently cpumask is used for 'real' CPUs, but IMO scheduler group > should operate on thread IDs instead. > We need a clear understanding of these concepts so we can extend the architecture to use (CPU or thread) groups for "local" scheduling. > >> E.g. odp_cpu_id() is good for debugging (e.g. that thread pinning is >> working). >> > > > _______________________________________________ > lng-odp mailing list > lng-odp@lists.linaro.org > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp >
_______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list lng-odp@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
