From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH 18.05 v4] eal: add function to return number of detected sockets Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 23:43:14 +0100 Message-ID: <1616173.z6xibKYU3a@xps> References: <750e30c6dcc7a22a87df9c56fb824042b1db984f.1517848624.git.anatoly.burakov@intel.com> <20180308121229.GA8660@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, gowrishankar.m@linux.vnet.ibm.com To: "Burakov, Anatoly" , Bruce Richardson , Chao Zhu Return-path: Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52FBB4C76 for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 23:43:30 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 08/03/2018 15:38, Burakov, Anatoly: > On 08-Mar-18 12:12 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > Question: we are ok assuming that the socket numbers are sequential, or > > nearly so, and knowing the maximum socket number seen is a good > > approximation of the actual physical sockets? I know in terms of cores > > on a system, the core id's often jump - are there systems where the > > socket numbers do too? > > I am not aware of any system that would jump sockets like that. I'm open > to corrections, however :) I think some IBM CPUs had this kind of jump in socket numbering. Chao?