Brice Goglin, le Sat 30 Jan 2010 18:17:31 +0100, a écrit :
> By the way, lstopo --whole-system fails on my dual-core machine when
> core#1 is offline and debug is enabled:
Indeed, in that case the Linux backend reports too big cpusets, I've
added an automatic restriction to the existing PROC objec
Brice Goglin, le Sat 30 Jan 2010 18:17:31 +0100, a écrit :
> Wait, does WHOLE_SYSTEM also toggle the ignoring of offline_cpus in
> obj->cpuset?
Yes, I believe it has always been that way.
Samuel
Brice Goglin, le Sat 30 Jan 2010 17:34:32 +0100, a écrit :
> Most applications want the list of procs that are
> online and allowed. So they'll have to compute the intersection of
> online and allowed. I think it'd be better ot have "obj->cpuset"
> contains this intersection. And rename the current
Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Yes, if we weren't wanting to express contradictory things it'd be way
> simpler, but we want to. I don't believe duplicating information will
> help the programmer to understand things. For now, I can see three
> usage cases:
>
> - An application wants to bind itself som
Brice Goglin, le Sat 30 Jan 2010 17:40:29 +0100, a écrit :
> Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Brice Goglin, le Sat 30 Jan 2010 17:34:32 +0100, a écrit :
> >
> >> But now that I understand all this, I wonder what application developers
> >> will think about it. Most applications want the list of procs
Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Brice Goglin, le Sat 30 Jan 2010 17:34:32 +0100, a écrit :
>
>> But now that I understand all this, I wonder what application developers
>> will think about it. Most applications want the list of procs that are
>> online and allowed.
>>
>
> And that's what they alre
Brice Goglin, le Sat 30 Jan 2010 17:34:32 +0100, a écrit :
> But now that I understand all this, I wonder what application developers
> will think about it. Most applications want the list of procs that are
> online and allowed.
And that's what they already get by default unless they set the
WHOLE
Samuel Thibault wrote:
> What about now (r1711)?
>
Yes, it's good now.
But now that I understand all this, I wonder what application developers
will think about it. Most applications want the list of procs that are
online and allowed. So they'll have to compute the intersection of
online and a
Brice Goglin, le Sat 30 Jan 2010 17:05:29 +0100, a écrit :
> >> What's the difference between obj->cpuset and the other obj->*cpuset ?
> >> Some documentation is missing there,
> >>
> >
> > Is the documentation on the right of the fields not sufficient?
> >
>
> No at all...
What about now
Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Brice Goglin, le Sat 30 Jan 2010 16:42:34 +0100, a écrit :
>
>> Do we want a #define HWLOC_API_VERSION to help people support both the
>> 0.9 and the 1.0 APIs at runtime ?
>>
>
> At build time you mean?
>
Yes.
>> What's the difference between obj->cpuset and th
Brice Goglin, le Sat 30 Jan 2010 16:42:34 +0100, a écrit :
> Do we want a #define HWLOC_API_VERSION to help people support both the
> 0.9 and the 1.0 APIs at runtime ?
At build time you mean?
> What's the difference between obj->cpuset and the other obj->*cpuset ?
> Some documentation is missing
11 matches
Mail list logo
