Re: [PATCH v2] sched/topology: Check average distances to remote packages

Peter Zijlstra
2026-02-25T22:30:36Z

On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 01:37:11PM -0800, Tim Chen wrote:
> On Wed, 2026-02-25 at 17:32 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 04:44:09PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, so this assumes that all u sized clusters on the trace are similar
> > > and 'sane' without verification.
> >
> > That gave me an idea; how's this then?
>
> Sorry I was sick for a few days. Just catching up on this
> thread here. I think your patch takes care of both GNR SNC-3
> with 3 compute dies (with non-symmetric remote
> distances) and generic SNC-2 with 2 dies (symmetric
> distances) very well.
>
> Minor suggestion below for the patch.
>
> Will ask the original GNR teams with the problem to try
> it out.

Since HPE can obviously have a sane SLIT table; why can't we simply
claim the SLIT table they had is broken and needs fixing?

Also, is there really no enumeration of the SNC mode available; must we
really divinate?