> > You should avoid physical numbering at any cost.
The trouble is that other Linux tools (like ps) are using the physical numbering. I will need to think about how to come around this. On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 4:46 PM Guillaume Mercier < guillaume.merc...@u-bordeaux.fr> wrote: > > Hi, > > You should avoid physical numbering at any cost. > > Guillaume > > On 9/6/19 4:38 PM, Jirka Hladky wrote: > > Thanks for the feedback! I have never seen anything like that so I have > > assumed it's a bug:-) > > > > I was already thinking about using the logical numbering - it's probably > > the best solution. > > > > Merci beaucoup! > > Jirka > > > > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 4:13 PM Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@inria.fr > > <mailto:samuel.thiba...@inria.fr>> wrote: > > > > Brice Goglin, le ven. 06 sept. 2019 16:07:13 +0200, a ecrit: > > > physical_package_id don't have to be between 0 and N-1, > > > > Which is the very reason for the logical IDs that hwloc provide :) > > > > Samuel > > _______________________________________________ > > hwloc-devel mailing list > > hwloc-devel@lists.open-mpi.org <mailto: > hwloc-devel@lists.open-mpi.org> > > https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/hwloc-devel > > > > > > > > -- > > -Jirka > > > > _______________________________________________ > > hwloc-devel mailing list > > hwloc-devel@lists.open-mpi.org > > https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/hwloc-devel > > > -- -Jirka
_______________________________________________ hwloc-devel mailing list hwloc-devel@lists.open-mpi.org https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/hwloc-devel
