On Oct 3, 2009, at 8:21 AM, Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
Ok you are right that storing in the struct might be overkill, and
about performance I fully agree, space not so much, especially if
you really want to cache all the cpuset for all objects, this still
grows quadratically, and allocates a lot
On 5-ott-09, at 14:27, Jeff Squyres wrote:
On Oct 3, 2009, at 8:21 AM, Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
Ok you are right that storing in the struct might be overkill, and
about performance I fully agree, space not so much, especially if
you really want to cache all the cpuset for all objects, this sti
Fawzi Mohamed, le Mon 05 Oct 2009 15:23:23 +0200, a écrit :
> well you assume you have a single copy of the whole system structure,
> I am not sure that would be the case, and while the memory per core is
> growing, the memory per thread is not growing much,... but anyway that
> is not the im
On Oct 5, 2009, at 9:23 AM, Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
yes you are right, I was unclear, I meant that I would pass a cpu_set
struct by value (not always pass a pointer).
If one wants to later migrate to passing just a pointer, then
internally this struct can have just a single pointer as field.
Ah,
On 5-ott-09, at 15:31, Samuel Thibault wrote:
Fawzi Mohamed, le Mon 05 Oct 2009 15:23:23 +0200, a écrit :
well you assume you have a single copy of the whole system structure,
I am not sure that would be the case, and while the memory per core
is
growing, the memory per thread is not growing
On 5-ott-09, at 16:02, Jeff Squyres wrote:
On Oct 5, 2009, at 9:23 AM, Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
yes you are right, I was unclear, I meant that I would pass a cpu_set
struct by value (not always pass a pointer).
If one wants to later migrate to passing just a pointer, then
internally this struct c
Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
> ok as I said to me it is not so strange (maybe init/clear would be a
> better name though), but indeed it might confuse people, so probably
> better avoid it.
> Force the user to to the right thing is better.
>
> So the question remains, opaque + functions, or public...
I ha
On Oct 5, 2009, at 10:34 AM, Brice Goglin wrote:
I haven't had time to actually fully implement this yet, but my last
plan was opaque pointer + functions such as:
hwloc_cpuset_t hwloc_cpuset_alloc(void);
void hwloc_cpuset_destroy(hwloc_cpuset_t cpuset);
Minor quibble: it might be good
