Tom Vier wrote:
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 04:26:47PM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
It's not clear if that's bizarre practice on AMD system boards or if
it's mis-reported. Of course Tom may be running a NUMA setup, in which
case I won't guess what's expected to be displayed. I've added him to
the CC
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 04:26:47PM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> It's not clear if that's bizarre practice on AMD system boards or if
> it's mis-reported. Of course Tom may be running a NUMA setup, in which
> case I won't guess what's expected to be displayed. I've added him to
> the CC list, in
> For some Intel processors... Tom Vier just posted his cpuinfo which shows all
> of his processors, which he notes are in separate sockets, are identified as
> physical zero. I didn't find any Intel systems which lacked unique physical
> ID,
> but clearly that's not true everywhere.
Hmmh what w
Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote:
This is 2xXeonHT, is, 4 cpus on 2 packages:
cat /proc/cpuinfo:
processor : 0
...
physical id : 0
siblings: 2
core id : 0
cpu cores : 1
processor : 1
...
physical id : 0
siblings: 2
core id : 0
cpu cores
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 08:56:03PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> Compare the 'physical id' fields of /proc/cpuinfo, and count
> how many unique values you get.
It doesn't work for opteron, at least. These are in two sockets, but the
phys id is the same.
processor : 0
vendor_id : Authenti
* Dave Jones ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Compare the 'physical id' fields of /proc/cpuinfo, and count
> how many unique values you get.
> Ie, on my dual+ht, I see..
>
> physical id : 0
> physical id : 0
> physical id : 3
> physical id : 3
>
> Which indicates 2 real CPUs split in
>This is 2xXeonHT, is, 4 cpus on 2 packages:
>
>cat /proc/cpuinfo:
>
>processor : 0
>...
>physical id: 0
>siblings : 2
>core id: 0
>cpu cores : 1
>
>processor : 1
>...
>physical id: 0
>siblings : 2
>core id: 0
>cpu cores : 1
Dan Maas wrote:
Is there a canonical way for user-space software to determine how many
real CPUs are present in a system (as opposed to HyperThreaded or
otherwise virtual CPUs)?
We have an application that for performance reasons wants to run one
process per CPU. However, on a HyperThreaded system
On 03.22, Dan Maas wrote:
> Is there a canonical way for user-space software to determine how many
> real CPUs are present in a system (as opposed to HyperThreaded or
> otherwise virtual CPUs)?
>
This is 2xXeonHT, is, 4 cpus on 2 packages:
cat /proc/cpuinfo:
processor : 0
...
physical id
On Mon, Mar 21, 2005 at 08:27:26PM -0500, Dan Maas wrote:
> Is there a canonical way for user-space software to determine how many
> real CPUs are present in a system (as opposed to HyperThreaded or
> otherwise virtual CPUs)?
>
> We have an application that for performance reasons wants to ru
Is there a canonical way for user-space software to determine how many
real CPUs are present in a system (as opposed to HyperThreaded or
otherwise virtual CPUs)?
We have an application that for performance reasons wants to run one
process per CPU. However, on a HyperThreaded system /proc/cpuinfo
l
11 matches
Mail list logo