Hi,
reading a hwloc-v1.2-a4 manual, on page 15, i look an example with 4-socket
2-core machine with hyperthreading.
Core id's are not exclusive as said before. PU's id are exclusive but not
physically sequential (I suppose)
PU P#0 is in socket P#0 on Core P#0. PU P#1 is in another socket! (core
Le 01/08/2011 12:16, Gabriele Fatigati a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> reading a hwloc-v1.2-a4 manual, on page 15, i look an example
> with 4-socket 2-core machine with hyperthreading.
>
> Core id's are not exclusive as said before. PU's id are exclusive but
> not physically sequential (I suppose)
>
> PU P#0 i
Hi Brice,
so, if I inderstand well, PU P# numbers are not the same specified as
HWLOC_OBJ_PU flag?
2011/8/1 Brice Goglin
> Le 01/08/2011 12:16, Gabriele Fatigati a écrit :
> > Hi,
> >
> > reading a hwloc-v1.2-a4 manual, on page 15, i look an example
> > with 4-socket 2-core machine with hyper
Gabriele Fatigati, le Mon 01 Aug 2011 14:48:11 +0200, a écrit :
> so, if I inderstand well, PU P# numbers are not the same specified as
> HWLOC_OBJ_PU flag?
They are, in the os_index (aka physical index) field.
Samuel
"PU P#0" means "PU object with physical index 0".
"P#" prefix means "physical index".
"L#" prefix means "logical index" (the one you want to use in
get_obj_by_type).
Use -l or -p to switch from one to the other in lstopo.
Brice
Le 01/08/2011 14:47, Gabriele Fatigati a écrit :
> Hi Brice,
>
> so
Hi Brice,
you said:
"PU P#0" means "PU object with physical index 0".
"P#" prefix means "physical index".
But from the hwloc manual, page 58:
HWLOC_OBJ_PU: Processing Unit, or (Logical) Processor..
but it is in conflict with what you said :(
2011/8/1 Brice Goglin
> **
> "PU P#0" means "P
You're confusing object types with index types.
PU is an object type, like Core, Socket, ... "logical processor" is a
generic name for cores when there's no SMT, hardware threads when
there's SMT/Hyperthreading, ... PU is basically the smallest thing that
can run a software thread.
"P#" is just t
Ok,
now it's more clear. Just a little question. Why in a NUMA machine, PU# are
sequential (page 17), and in a non NUMA machine are not sequential? ( page
16)
2011/8/1 Brice Goglin
> **
> You're confusing object types with index types.
>
> PU is an object type, like Core, Socket, ... "logical p
It's just a coincidence. Most modern machines (many of them are NUMA)
have non sequential numbers (to maximize memory bandwidth in the dumb
cases).
Brice
Le 01/08/2011 15:29, Gabriele Fatigati a écrit :
> Ok,
>
> now it's more clear. Just a little question. Why in a NUMA machine,
> PU# are seq
Brice Goglin, le Mon 01 Aug 2011 22:07:33 +0200, a écrit :
> The Hardware Locality (hwloc) team is pleased to announce the first
> release candidate of version 1.2.1
>
> http://www.open-mpi.org/projects/hwloc/
Could someone test on AIX?
Samuel
10 matches
Mail list logo