Re: [hwloc-devel] Strange CPU topology numbering on dual socket ARM server with 2×ThunderX2 CN9975

2019-09-06 Thread Jirka Hladky
> > Yes, that is why hwloc provides both, and hwloc-calc can be used to > convert between them for instance. Exactly! I use hwloc-calc quite heavily to connect both worlds. On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 5:21 PM Samuel Thibault wrote: > Jirka Hladky, le ven. 06 sept. 2019 16:52:30 +0200, a ecrit: > >

Re: [hwloc-devel] Strange CPU topology numbering on dual socket ARM server with 2×ThunderX2 CN9975

2019-09-06 Thread Samuel Thibault
Jirka Hladky, le ven. 06 sept. 2019 16:52:30 +0200, a ecrit: > The trouble is that other Linux tools (like ps) are using the physical > numbering. Yes, that is why hwloc provides both, and hwloc-calc can be used to convert between them for instance. Samuel

Re: [hwloc-devel] Strange CPU topology numbering on dual socket ARM server with 2×ThunderX2 CN9975

2019-09-06 Thread Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) via hwloc-devel
On Sep 6, 2019, at 10:52 AM, Jirka Hladky mailto:jhla...@redhat.com>> wrote: You should avoid physical numbering at any cost. The trouble is that other Linux tools (like ps) are using the physical numbering. I will need to think about how to come around this. Use hwloc for everything! ;-) (I

Re: [hwloc-devel] Strange CPU topology numbering on dual socket ARM server with 2×ThunderX2 CN9975

2019-09-06 Thread Jirka Hladky
> > You should avoid physical numbering at any cost. The trouble is that other Linux tools (like ps) are using the physical numbering. I will need to think about how to come around this. On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 4:46 PM Guillaume Mercier < guillaume.merc...@u-bordeaux.fr> wrote: > > Hi, > > You s

Re: [hwloc-devel] Strange CPU topology numbering on dual socket ARM server with 2×ThunderX2 CN9975

2019-09-06 Thread Jirka Hladky
Thanks for the feedback! I have never seen anything like that so I have assumed it's a bug:-) I was already thinking about using the logical numbering - it's probably the best solution. Merci beaucoup! Jirka On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 4:13 PM Samuel Thibault wrote: > Brice Goglin, le ven. 06 sept.

Re: [hwloc-devel] Strange CPU topology numbering on dual socket ARM server with 2×ThunderX2 CN9975

2019-09-06 Thread Samuel Thibault
Brice Goglin, le ven. 06 sept. 2019 16:07:13 +0200, a ecrit: > physical_package_id don't have to be between 0 and N-1, Which is the very reason for the logical IDs that hwloc provide :) Samuel ___ hwloc-devel mailing list hwloc-devel@lists.open-mpi.org

Re: [hwloc-devel] Strange CPU topology numbering on dual socket ARM server with 2×ThunderX2 CN9975

2019-09-06 Thread Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) via hwloc-devel
FWIW / in addition to what Brice said: this is why hwloc also has "logical" ordering (in addition to the "physical" ordering). On Sep 6, 2019, at 10:07 AM, Brice Goglin mailto:brice.gog...@inria.fr>> wrote: Hello Jirka I don't think there's a bug here. physical_package_id don't have to be b

Re: [hwloc-devel] Strange CPU topology numbering on dual socket ARM server with 2×ThunderX2 CN9975

2019-09-06 Thread Brice Goglin
Hello Jirka I don't think there's a bug here. physical_package_id don't have to be between 0 and N-1, they just have to be different to identify packages and cores between packages. Having other values is uncommon on x86 but quite common on POWER at least. core_id is even worse. They are basical