All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: dietmar.eggemann@arm.com (Dietmar Eggemann)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/6] sched: rework of sched_domain topology definition
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 13:48:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <531F142C.2030203@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtDHfXxheXBoPeAxMGROroHa7YrW7y_RCB9nSoKCeTa66w@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/03/14 13:27, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 11 March 2014 11:31, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 04:32:35PM +0800, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>>>> Never got the new name DIE for CPU? Might confuse people when they use
>>>> /proc/sys/kernel/sched_domain/cpuX/domainY/name or sched_domain_debug_one().
>>>
>>> In fact, CPU is also confusing because it's used for different things.
>>> But if it makes things even more confusing, i can come back to CPU
>>
>> Yeah, not sure DIE is the right thing either; because there's multi-die
>> packages that get classified under CPU :-)
>>
>> Take for example the Core 2 Quad, which was 2 dual core dies glued
>> together in a single package.
>>
>> There's also the AMD bulldozer which glued two dies into a single
>> package; but for those its not a problem because each die is a separate
>> numa node, so there DIE would actually be the correct term and PACKAGE
>> would be wrong.
>>
>> So while CPU sucks, I'm not sure we can come up with anything that's
>> actually correct. That said; we could try for something less wrong than
>> CPU :-)
> 
> OK
> 
> Dietmar,
> 
> Have you got another naming that DIE that could suit better ?
> otherwise i will keep it

If backward compatibility is not an issue here, keep it.

-- Dietmar

> 
> Vincent
> 
>>
>> I'm not sure there are a lot of people who see/know the names of these
>> domains to be bothered by a change in them; it might be limited to just
>> us for all I know.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
>> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: "fenghua.yu@intel.com" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
	"linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org>,
	"tony.luck@intel.com" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	"linux@arm.linux.org.uk" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	"benh@kernel.crashing.org" <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"cmetcalf@tilera.com" <cmetcalf@tilera.com>,
	"mingo@kernel.org" <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"james.hogan@imgtec.com" <james.hogan@imgtec.com>,
	"schwidefsky@de.ibm.com" <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] sched: rework of sched_domain topology definition
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 13:48:28 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <531F142C.2030203@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtDHfXxheXBoPeAxMGROroHa7YrW7y_RCB9nSoKCeTa66w@mail.gmail.com>

On 11/03/14 13:27, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 11 March 2014 11:31, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 04:32:35PM +0800, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>>>> Never got the new name DIE for CPU? Might confuse people when they use
>>>> /proc/sys/kernel/sched_domain/cpuX/domainY/name or sched_domain_debug_one().
>>>
>>> In fact, CPU is also confusing because it's used for different things.
>>> But if it makes things even more confusing, i can come back to CPU
>>
>> Yeah, not sure DIE is the right thing either; because there's multi-die
>> packages that get classified under CPU :-)
>>
>> Take for example the Core 2 Quad, which was 2 dual core dies glued
>> together in a single package.
>>
>> There's also the AMD bulldozer which glued two dies into a single
>> package; but for those its not a problem because each die is a separate
>> numa node, so there DIE would actually be the correct term and PACKAGE
>> would be wrong.
>>
>> So while CPU sucks, I'm not sure we can come up with anything that's
>> actually correct. That said; we could try for something less wrong than
>> CPU :-)
> 
> OK
> 
> Dietmar,
> 
> Have you got another naming that DIE that could suit better ?
> otherwise i will keep it

If backward compatibility is not an issue here, keep it.

-- Dietmar

> 
> Vincent
> 
>>
>> I'm not sure there are a lot of people who see/know the names of these
>> domains to be bothered by a change in them; it might be limited to just
>> us for all I know.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
>> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
> 



  reply	other threads:[~2014-03-11 13:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-03-05  7:18 [RFC 0/6] rework sched_domain topology description Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05  7:18 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05  7:18 ` [RFC 1/6] sched: remove unused SCHED_INIT_NODE Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05  7:18 ` [PATCH 2/6] sched: rework of sched_domain topology definition Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05  7:18   ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05 17:09   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-05 17:09     ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-06  8:32     ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-06  8:32       ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-11 10:31       ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-11 10:31         ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-11 13:27         ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-11 13:27           ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-11 13:48           ` Dietmar Eggemann [this message]
2014-03-11 13:48             ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-05  7:18 ` [RFC 3/6] sched: s390: create a dedicated topology table Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05  7:18 ` [RFC 4/6] sched: powerpc: " Vincent Guittot
2014-03-11 10:08   ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-03-11 10:08     ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-03-11 13:18     ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-11 13:18       ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-12  4:42       ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-03-12  4:42         ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-03-12  7:44         ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-12  7:44           ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-12 11:04           ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-12 11:04             ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-14  2:30             ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-03-14  2:30               ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-03-14  2:14           ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-03-14  2:14             ` Preeti U Murthy
2014-03-05  7:18 ` [RFC 5/6] sched: add a new SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN for sched_domain Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05  7:18 ` [RFC 6/6] sched: ARM: create a dedicated scheduler topology table Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05 22:38   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-05 22:38     ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-06  8:42     ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-06  8:42       ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-05 23:17 ` [RFC 0/6] rework sched_domain topology description Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-05 23:17   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-06  9:04   ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-06  9:04     ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-06 12:31     ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-06 12:31       ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-07  2:47       ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-07  2:47         ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-08 12:40         ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-08 12:40           ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-10 13:21           ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-10 13:21             ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-11 13:17           ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-11 13:17             ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-12 13:28             ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-12 13:28               ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-12 13:47               ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-12 13:47                 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-13 14:07                 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-13 14:07                   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-17 11:52               ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-17 11:52                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-19 19:15                 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-19 19:15                   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-03-20  8:28                   ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-20  8:28                     ` Vincent Guittot
2014-03-11 13:08         ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-11 13:08           ` Peter Zijlstra

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=531F142C.2030203@arm.com \
    --to=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.