Re: [hwloc-devel] Attribute request

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

Re: [hwloc-devel] Attribute request

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

Re: [hwloc-devel] Attribute request

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

Re: [hwloc-devel] Attribute request

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

Re: [hwloc-devel] Attribute request

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

[hwloc-devel] Attribute request

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