On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 08:01:26AM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > build_sched_domain: cpu: 0 level: SMT cpu_map: 0-3 tl->mask: 0,2 > [ 0.254433] build_sched_domain: cpu: 0 level: MC cpu_map: 0-3 tl->mask: 0 > [ 0.254516] build_sched_domain: cpu: 0 level: DIE cpu_map: 0-3 tl->mask: > 0-3 > [ 0.254600] build_sched_domain: cpu: 1 level: SMT cpu_map: 0-3 tl->mask: > 1,3 > [ 0.254683] build_sched_domain: cpu: 1 level: MC cpu_map: 0-3 tl->mask: 1 > [ 0.254766] build_sched_domain: cpu: 1 level: DIE cpu_map: 0-3 tl->mask: > 0-3 > [ 0.254850] build_sched_domain: cpu: 2 level: SMT cpu_map: 0-3 tl->mask: > 0,2 > [ 0.254932] build_sched_domain: cpu: 2 level: MC cpu_map: 0-3 tl->mask: 2 > [ 0.255005] build_sched_domain: cpu: 2 level: DIE cpu_map: 0-3 tl->mask: > 0-3 > [ 0.255091] build_sched_domain: cpu: 3 level: SMT cpu_map: 0-3 tl->mask: > 1,3 > [ 0.255176] build_sched_domain: cpu: 3 level: MC cpu_map: 0-3 tl->mask: 3 > [ 0.255260] build_sched_domain: cpu: 3 level: DIE cpu_map: 0-3 tl->mask: > 0-3
*blink*... That's, shall we say, unexpected. Let me ponder that a bit. HPA any clue why a machine might report such a weird topology? AFAIK threads _always_ share cache. So how can cpu_coregroup_mask be a subset (instead of a superset) of topology_thread_cpumask? Let me go stare at the x86 topology mask setup code. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
