On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 10:48:54AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> But reading your explanation, it looks like the Linux topology setup
> could actually unravel the fused-faux-SMT8 into two independent SMT4
> parts, negating that firmware option.
Ah, it looks like that's exactly what you're doing.
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 01:48:22PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> * pet...@infradead.org [2020-07-22 09:46:24]:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 05:08:10PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > > Currently "CACHE" domain happens to be the 2nd sched domain as per
> > > powerpc_topology. This domain
* pet...@infradead.org [2020-07-22 09:46:24]:
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 05:08:10PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > Currently "CACHE" domain happens to be the 2nd sched domain as per
> > powerpc_topology. This domain will collapse if cpumask of l2-cache is
> > same as SMT domain. However we
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 05:08:10PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> Currently "CACHE" domain happens to be the 2nd sched domain as per
> powerpc_topology. This domain will collapse if cpumask of l2-cache is
> same as SMT domain. However we could generalize this domain such that it
> could mean
* Gautham R Shenoy [2020-07-22 12:26:40]:
> Hello Srikar,
>
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 05:08:10PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > Currently "CACHE" domain happens to be the 2nd sched domain as per
> > powerpc_topology. This domain will collapse if cpumask of l2-cache is
> > same as SMT
Hello Srikar,
On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 05:08:10PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> Currently "CACHE" domain happens to be the 2nd sched domain as per
> powerpc_topology. This domain will collapse if cpumask of l2-cache is
> same as SMT domain. However we could generalize this domain such that it