On Thursday 27 May 2010 11:47:25 pm Brice Goglin wrote:
> Le 27/05/2010 23:28, Jirka Hladky a écrit :
> >> hwloc-calc doesn't accept input from stdin, it only reads the
> >> command-line. We have a TODO entry about this, I'll work on it soon.
> >>
> >> For now, you can do:
> >> hwloc-distrib
Le 27/05/2010 23:28, Jirka Hladky a écrit :
hwloc-calc doesn't accept input from stdin, it only reads the
command-line. We have a TODO entry about this, I'll work on it soon.
For now, you can do:
hwloc-distrib ... | xargs -n 1 utils/hwloc-calc
I forgot to use "-n 1" switch in xargs to
Hi Brice,
>
> My feeling is that --taskset is just an option that changes the way
> cpuset are displayed with --cpuset or --cpuset-only.
> I'll change the code so that --taskset also enables --cpuset if not
> already done.
Yes, you are right. I agree!
> hwloc-calc doesn't accept input from stdin
On 24/05/2010 21:28, Jirka Hladky wrote:
> What's confusing is that --taskset alone (without --cpuset) has no effect at
> all. IMHO, --cpuset and --taskset should be mutually exclusive options.
>
My feeling is that --taskset is just an option that changes the way
cpuset are displayed with --cp
On Saturday 22 May 2010 11:42:31 am Brice Goglin wrote:
> On 17/05/2010 17:41, Jirka Hladky wrote:
> > I don't have system with 128 CPUs, but according to man page it's
> > 0x8000
> >
> > I have attached the source code as well. See str_to_cpuset function. It
> > suppo
On 17/05/2010 17:41, Jirka Hladky wrote:
>
> I don't have system with 128 CPUs, but according to man page it's
> 0x8000
>
> I have attached the source code as well. See str_to_cpuset function. It
> supports cpuset hex mask of any length.
>
> I understand your point to
> Hi Brice,
>
> taskset format is same on 32bits architecture on a 64bits architecture.
>
> I don't have system with 128 CPUs, but according to man page it's
> 0x8000
>
> I have attached the source code as well. See str_to_cpuset function. It
> supports cpuset hex mas
On Monday 17 May 2010 05:49:01 pm Jeff Squyres wrote:
> On May 17, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Jirka Hladky wrote:
> > BTW, is there any time-plan for hwloc 1.0 to be released?
>
> There were some trivial changes since rc6; I have one more trivial change
> to make today and then we're probably good to go.
On May 17, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Jirka Hladky wrote:
> BTW, is there any time-plan for hwloc 1.0 to be released?
There were some trivial changes since rc6; I have one more trivial change to
make today and then we're probably good to go.
--
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
For corporate legal infor
Jirka Hladky, le Mon 17 May 2010 17:41:37 +0200, a écrit :
> BTW, is there any time-plan for hwloc 1.0 to be released?
When it's ready :)
Samuel
On Monday 17 May 2010 07:37:58 am Brice Goglin wrote:
> On 17/05/2010 00:23, Jirka Hladky wrote:
> > Hi Brice,
> >
> > thanks a lot for the clarification!
> >
> > I got access to 64 cores system and you are indeed right! There is
> > however an issue that taskset does not support 0x8000,0x0 f
On 17/05/2010 00:23, Jirka Hladky wrote:
>
> Hi Brice,
>
> thanks a lot for the clarification!
>
> I got access to 64 cores system and you are indeed right! There is
> however an issue that taskset does not support 0x8000,0x0 format.
>
> taskset 0x8000,0x0 sleep 100
>
> failed to parse CPU
Hi Brice,
thanks a lot for the clarification!
I got access to 64 cores system and you are indeed right! There is however an
issue that taskset does not support 0x8000,0x0 format.
taskset 0x8000,0x0 sleep 100
failed to parse CPU mask 0x8000,0x0
However,
taskset 0x8000 s
No, there is no such limit. If you have 128cores, the cpuset string will
be 0x,0x,0x,0x
As long as you have less than 1024 cores, everything should work fine.
For more than 1024, you'll need to rebuild with a manual change in the
source code, or wait for hwloc 1.1.
Thanks Samuel!!
The data looks fine. hwloc rocks.
I assume
--cpuset
option (lstopo command)
is not supported on such systems, right?
My understanding is that cpuset masks works only upto 64 cores. Is it correct?
Thanks
Jirka
On Friday 14 May 2010 08:06:12 pm Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Jeff Squ
Jeff Squyres, le Fri 14 May 2010 09:09:44 -0400, a écrit :
> I believe that Brice / Samuel (the two main developers) have tested hwloc on
> an old Altix 4700 with 256 itanium cores.
>
> I don't have their exact results, and I don't see them on IM right now, so I
> don't know if they're around
Thanks Jeff!
Brice, Samuel could you please share your results?
Thanks a lot & have a nice weekend!
Jirka
On Friday 14 May 2010 03:09:44 pm Jeff Squyres wrote:
> I believe that Brice / Samuel (the two main developers) have tested hwloc
> on an old Altix 4700 with 256 itanium cores.
>
> I don't
I believe that Brice / Samuel (the two main developers) have tested hwloc on an
old Altix 4700 with 256 itanium cores.
I don't have their exact results, and I don't see them on IM right now, so I
don't know if they're around today or not...
On May 14, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Jirka Hladky wrote:
>
Hello,
I have tested hwloc on several systems and I was very impressed with results.
It's a great tool!
The biggest box I have tested it on had 64 CPUs. (32 cores + hyper threading
enabled).
I wonder if somebody has tested it on box with more than 64 CPUs. If so, can
you please share your res
19 matches
Mail list logo
