From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Cc: "J.A. Magallón" <jamagallon@ono.com>,
"Glauber Costa" <gcosta@redhat.com>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Problems with -git14
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 10:22:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080429102207.7f20f63c@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0804301516580.30549@blonde.site>
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:17:46 +0100 (BST)
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com> wrote:
> One point worth noting - is it a worry? Prior to that smpboot merge,
> my Xeon booted the two HT siblings on one physical first, then the
> two siblings on the other physical after - when i386, but alternated
> them when x86_64. Since the merge, the x86_64 sequence is unchanged,
> but the i386 sequence is now like x86_64. I prefer this consistency,
> and I prefer the new sequence: booting with maxcpus=2 then uses the
> independent physicals without HT sharing; but surprises in store?
>
this is how it always was supposed to be!
At least this is how Intel specifies it to the BIOS vendors (but remember, it's the bios
that pretty much sets the cpu order; some will be weird).
Exactly for the maxcpus=2 reason... (and for systems where the cpu scheduler does
load balancing "from 0 up" it also makes sense)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-30 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-29 23:56 Problems with -git14 J.A. Magallón
2008-04-30 15:17 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-04-29 17:22 ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2008-04-30 15:54 ` Glauber Costa
2008-05-05 7:13 ` Andrey Panin
2008-05-05 7:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-04-30 18:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-30 18:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-30 19:40 ` J.A. Magallón
2008-05-01 12:04 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-05-01 0:50 ` J.A. Magallón
2008-05-01 12:11 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-05-02 1:41 ` Nick Piggin
2008-05-06 19:13 ` Jens Axboe
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=20080429102207.7f20f63c@infradead.org \
--to=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gcosta@redhat.com \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=jamagallon@ono.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox