Re: [hwloc-devel] Attribute request

2014-01-29 Thread Ralph Castain 
I'd prefer your first option - it's easy enough to check the info objects for 
existence of a particular attribute.

On Jan 29, 2014, at 1:12 AM, Brice Goglin  wrote:

> Assuming people will confirm that ARM information isn't so simple, I wonder 
> where it's better to put architecture specific fields. With the proposed 
> solution, Intel and ARM would be different:
> Architecture=x86_64
> CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
> CPUModel=Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 0 @ 2.70GHz
> CPUModelNumber=45
> CPUFamilyNumber=6
> and
> Architecture=armv7l
> CPUVendor=cardhu
> CPUModel=ARMv7 Processor rev 9 (v7l)
> CPUImplementer=0x41
> CPUArchitecture=7
> CPUVariant=0x2
> CPUPart=0xc09
> CPURevision=9 
> 
> We could also merge those arch-specific into a single generic one:
> Architecture=x86_64
> CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
> CPUModel=Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 0 @ 2.70GHz
> CPUModelNumber=family=6;model=45
> and
> Architecture=armv7l
> CPUVendor=cardhu
> CPUModel=ARMv7 Processor rev 9 (v7l)
> 
> CPUModelNumber=implementer=0x41;architecture=7;variant=0x2;part=0xc09;revision=9
> 
> The drawback is that you'd have to parse CPUModelNumber to extract family and 
> model.
> 
> I am not sure which one is best.
> 
> Brice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Le 28/01/2014 00:09, Brice Goglin a écrit :
>> Hello,
>> I have some code that seems to work. Here's what it reports below. Does that 
>> look ok to you?
>> I had to modify quite a lot of things to make the parsing of /proc/cpuinfo 
>> more robust (the code is basically arch-specific now), so I am not sure 
>> we'll be able to backport this to OMPI.
>> Brice
>> 
>> 
>> * Sandy-Bridge Xeon E5 (Stampede)
>> CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
>> CPUModel=Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 0 @ 2.70GHz
>> CPUModelNumber=45
>> CPUFamilyNumber=6
>> * Old Nehalem-EX
>> CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
>> CPUModel=Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU   E7540  @ 2.00GHz
>> CPUModelNumber=46
>> CPUFamilyNumber=6
>> * Itanium
>> CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
>> CPUModel=Dual-Core Intel(R) Itanium(R) Processor 9140N
>> CPUModelNumber=1
>> CPUFamilyNumber=32
>> * AMD
>> CPUVendor=AuthenticAMD
>> CPUModel=Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 865
>> CPUModelNumber=33
>> CPUFamilyNumber=15
>> * MIC (Stampede)
>> CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
>> CPUModel=0b/01
>> CPUModelNumber=1
>> CPUFamilyNumber=11
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Le 23/01/2014 19:50, Ralph Castain a écrit :
>>> That would be perfect! Thanks
>>> 
>>> On Jan 23, 2014, at 10:27 AM, Brice Goglin  wrote:
>>> 
 Should be easy on Linux, sure.
 The model name is already known as CPUModel in hwloc.
 We should likely add CPUVendor (would be GenuineIntel or AuthenticAMD), 
 CPUFamily (or CPUFamilyNumber if there's a name for these families?) and 
 CPUModelNumber ?
 
 Brice
 
 
 
 
 Le 23/01/2014 19:09, Ralph Castain a écrit :
> Hi folks
> 
> Looking at the current topology info, I see you capture the model name 
> for the socket, but not a couple of other key things Intel could use:
> 
> cpu family  : 6
> model   : 44
> model name  : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU   E5645  @ 2.40GHz
> 
> 
> Both the cpu family and model are important to us - any issue with adding 
> them to the "infos" array?
> 
> Ralph
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> hwloc-devel mailing list
> hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel
 
 ___
 hwloc-devel mailing list
 hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
 http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> hwloc-devel mailing list
>>> hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> hwloc-devel mailing list
>> hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel
> 
> ___
> hwloc-devel mailing list
> hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel

Re: [hwloc-devel] Attribute request

2014-01-29 Thread Brice Goglin 
Assuming people will confirm that ARM information isn't so simple, I
wonder where it's better to put architecture specific fields. With the
proposed solution, Intel and ARM would be different:
Architecture=x86_64
CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
CPUModel=Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 0 @ 2.70GHz
CPUModelNumber=45
CPUFamilyNumber=6
and
Architecture=armv7l
CPUVendor=cardhu
CPUModel=ARMv7 Processor rev 9 (v7l)
CPUImplementer=0x41
CPUArchitecture=7
CPUVariant=0x2
CPUPart=0xc09
CPURevision=9

We could also merge those arch-specific into a single generic one:
Architecture=x86_64
CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
CPUModel=Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 0 @ 2.70GHz
CPUModelNumber=family=6;model=45
and
Architecture=armv7l
CPUVendor=cardhu
CPUModel=ARMv7 Processor rev 9 (v7l)

CPUModelNumber=implementer=0x41;architecture=7;variant=0x2;part=0xc09;revision=9

The drawback is that you'd have to parse CPUModelNumber to extract
family and model.

I am not sure which one is best.

Brice





Le 28/01/2014 00:09, Brice Goglin a écrit :
> Hello,
> I have some code that seems to work. Here's what it reports below.
> Does that look ok to you?
> I had to modify quite a lot of things to make the parsing of
> /proc/cpuinfo more robust (the code is basically arch-specific now),
> so I am not sure we'll be able to backport this to OMPI.
> Brice
>
>
> * Sandy-Bridge Xeon E5 (Stampede)
> CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
> CPUModel=Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 0 @ 2.70GHz
> CPUModelNumber=45
> CPUFamilyNumber=6
> * Old Nehalem-EX
> CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
> CPUModel=Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU   E7540  @ 2.00GHz
> CPUModelNumber=46
> CPUFamilyNumber=6
> * Itanium
> CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
> CPUModel=Dual-Core Intel(R) Itanium(R) Processor 9140N
> CPUModelNumber=1
> CPUFamilyNumber=32
> * AMD
> CPUVendor=AuthenticAMD
> CPUModel=Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 865
> CPUModelNumber=33
> CPUFamilyNumber=15
> * MIC (Stampede)
> CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
> CPUModel=0b/01
> CPUModelNumber=1
> CPUFamilyNumber=11
>
>
>
>
> Le 23/01/2014 19:50, Ralph Castain a écrit :
>> That would be perfect! Thanks
>>
>> On Jan 23, 2014, at 10:27 AM, Brice Goglin > > wrote:
>>
>>> Should be easy on Linux, sure.
>>> The model name is already known as CPUModel in hwloc.
>>> We should likely add CPUVendor (would be GenuineIntel or
>>> AuthenticAMD), CPUFamily (or CPUFamilyNumber if there's a name for
>>> these families?) and CPUModelNumber ?
>>>
>>> Brice
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 23/01/2014 19:09, Ralph Castain a écrit :
 Hi folks

 Looking at the current topology info, I see you capture the model
 name for the socket, but not a couple of other key things Intel
 could use:

 cpu family  : 6
 model   : 44
 model name  : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU   E5645  @ 2.40GHz


 Both the cpu family and model are important to us - any issue with
 adding them to the "infos" array?

 Ralph



 ___
 hwloc-devel mailing list
 hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
 http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel
>>>
>>> ___
>>> hwloc-devel mailing list
>>> hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org 
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> hwloc-devel mailing list
>> hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel
>
>
>
> ___
> hwloc-devel mailing list
> hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel

Re: [hwloc-devel] Attribute request

2014-01-27 Thread Ralph Castain 
Hello,
I have some code that seems to work. Here's what it reports below. Does that 
look ok to you?
I had to modify quite a lot of things to make the parsing of /proc/cpuinfo more 
robust (the code is basically arch-specific now), so I am not sure we'll be 
able to backport this to OMPI.
Brice


* Sandy-Bridge Xeon E5 (Stampede)
CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
CPUModel=Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 0 @ 2.70GHz
CPUModelNumber=45
CPUFamilyNumber=6
* Old Nehalem-EX
CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
CPUModel=Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU   E7540  @ 2.00GHz
CPUModelNumber=46
CPUFamilyNumber=6
* Itanium
CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
CPUModel=Dual-Core Intel(R) Itanium(R) Processor 9140N
CPUModelNumber=1
CPUFamilyNumber=32
* AMD
CPUVendor=AuthenticAMD
CPUModel=Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 865
CPUModelNumber=33
CPUFamilyNumber=15
* MIC (Stampede)
CPUVendor=GenuineIntel
CPUModel=0b/01
CPUModelNumber=1
CPUFamilyNumber=11




Le 23/01/2014 19:50, Ralph Castain a écrit :
> That would be perfect! Thanks
> 
> On Jan 23, 2014, at 10:27 AM, Brice Goglin  wrote:
> 
>> Should be easy on Linux, sure.
>> The model name is already known as CPUModel in hwloc.
>> We should likely add CPUVendor (would be GenuineIntel or AuthenticAMD), 
>> CPUFamily (or CPUFamilyNumber if there's a name for these families?) and 
>> CPUModelNumber ?
>> 
>> Brice
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Le 23/01/2014 19:09, Ralph Castain a écrit :
>>> Hi folks
>>> 
>>> Looking at the current topology info, I see you capture the model name for 
>>> the socket, but not a couple of other key things Intel could use:
>>> 
>>> cpu family  : 6
>>> model   : 44
>>> model name  : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU   E5645  @ 2.40GHz
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Both the cpu family and model are important to us - any issue with adding 
>>> them to the "infos" array?
>>> 
>>> Ralph
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> hwloc-devel mailing list
>>> hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel
>> 
>> ___
>> hwloc-devel mailing list
>> hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> hwloc-devel mailing list
> hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel

___
hwloc-devel mailing list
hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel

Re: [hwloc-devel] Attribute request

2014-01-23 Thread Ralph Castain 
That would be perfect! Thanks

On Jan 23, 2014, at 10:27 AM, Brice Goglin  wrote:

> Should be easy on Linux, sure.
> The model name is already known as CPUModel in hwloc.
> We should likely add CPUVendor (would be GenuineIntel or AuthenticAMD), 
> CPUFamily (or CPUFamilyNumber if there's a name for these families?) and 
> CPUModelNumber ?
> 
> Brice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Le 23/01/2014 19:09, Ralph Castain a écrit :
>> Hi folks
>> 
>> Looking at the current topology info, I see you capture the model name for 
>> the socket, but not a couple of other key things Intel could use:
>> 
>> cpu family  : 6
>> model   : 44
>> model name  : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU   E5645  @ 2.40GHz
>> 
>> 
>> Both the cpu family and model are important to us - any issue with adding 
>> them to the "infos" array?
>> 
>> Ralph
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> hwloc-devel mailing list
>> hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel
> 
> ___
> hwloc-devel mailing list
> hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel

Re: [hwloc-devel] Attribute request

2014-01-23 Thread Brice Goglin 
Should be easy on Linux, sure.
The model name is already known as CPUModel in hwloc.
We should likely add CPUVendor (would be GenuineIntel or AuthenticAMD),
CPUFamily (or CPUFamilyNumber if there's a name for these families?) and
CPUModelNumber ?

Brice




Le 23/01/2014 19:09, Ralph Castain a écrit :
> Hi folks
>
> Looking at the current topology info, I see you capture the model name
> for the socket, but not a couple of other key things Intel could use:
>
> cpu family  : 6
> model   : 44
> model name  : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU   E5645  @ 2.40GHz
>
>
> Both the cpu family and model are important to us - any issue with
> adding them to the "infos" array?
>
> Ralph
>
>
>
> ___
> hwloc-devel mailing list
> hwloc-de...@open-mpi.org
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel

[hwloc-devel] Attribute request

2014-01-23 Thread Ralph Castain 
Hi folks

Looking at the current topology info, I see you capture the model name for the 
socket, but not a couple of other key things Intel could use:

cpu family  : 6
model   : 44
model name  : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU   E5645  @ 2.40GHz


Both the cpu family and model are important to us - any issue with adding them 
to the "infos" array?

Ralph