On 12-01-2026 13:31, Zhao Liu wrote:
>>>> The current kernel doesn't have sensitivity to a level between L3 boundary 
>>>> and
>>>> socket. Also, most production systems in current AMD CPU landscape have 
>>>> CCD=CCX.
>>>> Only a handful of models feature CCD=2CCX, so this isn't an immediate 
>>>> pressing need.
>>>>
>>>> In QEMU's terminology, socket represents an actual socket and die 
>>>> represents the
>>>> L3 cache boundary. There is no intermediate level between them. Looking 
>>>> ahead,
>>>> when more granular topology information (like CCD) becomes necessary for 
>>>> VMs,
>>>> introducing a "diegroup" level would be the logical approach. This level 
>>>> would
>>>> fit naturally between die and socket, as its role cannot be fulfilled by
>>>> existing topology levels.
>>>
>>> With your nice clarification, I think this problem has become a bit easier.
>>>
>>> In fact, we can consider that CCD=CCX=die is currently the default
>>> assumption in QEMU. When future implementations require distinguishing 
>>> between
>>> these CCD/CCX concepts, we can simply introduce an additional "smp.tiles" 
>>> and
>>> map CCX to it. This may need a documentation or a compatibility option, but 
>>> I
>>> believe these extra efforts are worthwhile.
>>>
>>> And "smp.tiles" means "how many tiles in a die", so I feel it's perfect
>>> to describe CCX.
>>
>> That indeed looks like a cleaner solution. However, I'm concerned about
>> retaining compatibility with existing "dies". But yeah, that's a task for a
>> later time.
> 
> Yes, it may be necessary to address some compatibility issues. But I think
> this way could align with the topology mapping of the Linux kernel as much
> as possible.

This sounds like a good idea. Thanks.

> 
> Thanks,
> Zhao



Reply via email to