On Dec 10, 2009, at 5:22 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > Are you saying that the API will be all OS/physical, with conversion > > functions from #3 to convert to/from logical? > > No, it should stay logical, conversion would be just to translate into > OS/physical.
Ok -- good. Consistent (CLI and C) == good. We'll need translation functions for both directions, right? (to and from OS/physical) > > Additionally, what exactly is the logical ordering defined to be? > > See topology.c, it's always topologically ordered, and then ordered > by OS cpu numbers. So for instance if the topology is flat, the OS > CPU numbers would get used. Then the topology distorts the OS CPU > numbering. So logical ordering is as close as OS CPU numbering as > possible, constrained by topology. Awesome. As you noted, I only looked in the linux file; not the top-level topology.c. Cool. > > We need to guarantee that it is the same across every run, > > It is, unless the BIOS changes the CPU numbers. Agreed: nothing we can do about that. > > My point: if we're going to have a logical ordering, we should be able to > > provide at least some level of guarantee of stability about that logical > > ordering. > > For sure since that was precisely what I had in my when I put the > sorting code in the generic part. 2 steps ahead of me. Perfect. :-) -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com
