From: peterz@infradead.org (Peter Zijlstra)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 5/5] sched: ARM: create a dedicated scheduler topology table
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 18:04:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140425160419.GL11096@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtAq8PXS-n7A0W6ESe08m-6O3u84BcY3==+-0+63+uca9g@mail.gmail.com>
> The example above is consistent because CPU2 mask and CPU0 mask are
> fully exclusive
>
> so
> CPU0: cpu_corepower_mask=0-1
> CPU2: cpu_corepower_mask=2
> are consistent
>
> CPU0: cpu_corepower_mask=0-2
> CPU2: cpu_corepower_mask=0-2
> are also consistent
>
> but
>
> CPU0: cpu_corepower_mask=0-1
> CPU2: cpu_corepower_mask=0-2
> are not consistent
>
> and your example uses the last configuration
>
> To be more precise, the rule above applies on default SDT definition
> but the flag SD_OVERLAP enables such kind of overlap between group.
> Have you tried it ?
I've never tried degenerate stuff with SD_OVERLAP, it might horribly
explode -- its not actually meant to work.
The SD_OVERLAP comes from not fully connected NUMA topologies; suppose
something like:
0------1
| |
| |
2------3
or:
( 10 20 20 0 )
( 20 10 0 20 )
( 20 0 10 20 )
( 0 20 20 10 )
Your domain level that models the single-hop/20 distance has overlapping
masks:
N0: 0-2
N1: 0,1,3
N2: 0,2,3
N3: 1-3
I've never tried to construct a NUMA topology that would be overlapping
and have redundant bits in.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-25 16:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-11 9:44 [PATCH v4 0/5] rework sched_domain topology description Vincent Guittot
2014-04-11 9:44 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] sched: rework of sched_domain topology definition Vincent Guittot
2014-04-18 10:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-18 11:34 ` [PATCH] fix: " Vincent Guittot
2014-04-18 11:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-18 11:34 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] " Vincent Guittot
2014-04-11 9:44 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] sched: s390: create a dedicated topology table Vincent Guittot
2014-04-11 9:44 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] sched: powerpc: " Vincent Guittot
2014-04-11 9:44 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] sched: add a new SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN for sched_domain Vincent Guittot
2014-04-18 10:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-18 11:54 ` [PATCH] fix: sched: rework of sched_domain topology definition Vincent Guittot
2014-04-18 11:54 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] sched: add a new SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN for sched_domain Vincent Guittot
2014-04-11 9:44 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] sched: ARM: create a dedicated scheduler topology table Vincent Guittot
2014-04-23 11:46 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-04-23 14:46 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-04-23 15:26 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-04-24 7:30 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-04-24 12:48 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-04-25 7:45 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-04-25 15:55 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-04-25 16:04 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2014-04-25 16:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-04-12 12:56 ` [PATCH v4 0/5] rework sched_domain topology description Dietmar Eggemann
2014-04-14 7:29 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-04-15 7:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140425160419.GL11096@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).