Re: [hwloc-users] memory binding on Knights Landing

Brice Goglin writes: > I ran more benchmarks. What's really slow is the reading of all sysfs > files. About 90% of the topology building time is spent there on KNL. > We're reading more than 7000 files (most of them are 6 files for each > hardware thread and 6 files for

Re: [hwloc-users] memory binding on Knights Landing

Brice Goglin writes: > So what's really slow is reading sysfs and/or inserting all hwloc > objects in the tree. I need to do some profiling. And I am moving the > item "parallelize the discovery" higher in the TODO list :) It didn't seem to scale between systems with the

Re: [hwloc-users] memory binding on Knights Landing

Brice Goglin writes: > Is there anything to fix on the RPM side? Nothing significant, I think. The update Fedora version needed slight adjustment for hwloc-dump-hwdata, at least. > Intel people are carrefully > working with RedHat so that hwloc is properly packaged for

Re: [hwloc-users] memory binding on Knights Landing

Jeff Hammond writes: >> By the way, is it expected that binding will be slow on it? hwloc-bind >> is ~10 times slower (~1s) than on two-socket sandybridge, and ~3 times >> slower than on a 128-core, 16-socket system. >> >> Is this a bottleneck in any application? Are

Re: [hwloc-users] memory binding on Knights Landing

On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Dave Love wrote: > Brice Goglin writes: > > > Hello > > It's not a feature. This should work fine. > > Random guess: do you have NUMA headers on your build machine ? (package > > libnuma-dev or numactl-devel) > >

Re: [hwloc-users] memory binding on Knights Landing

Hello It's not a feature. This should work fine. Random guess: do you have NUMA headers on your build machine ? (package libnuma-dev or numactl-devel) (hwloc-info --support also report whether membinding is supported or not) Brice Le 08/09/2016 16:34, Dave Love a écrit : > I'm somewhat confused