From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dario Faggioli <raistlin@linux.it>
Subject: Re: strange cpu number from xm info
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 16:00:57 +0200
Message-ID: <1338472857.9414.10.camel@Abyss>
References: <4F7EE57D.4020207@oracle.com>
	<4F7F57A502000078000821B6@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<4F7F4B82.6040007@oracle.com>
	<1333784346.12209.108.camel@dagon.hellion.org.uk>
	<4FC76ED8.1040800@oracle.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8657162756082680239=="
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <4FC76ED8.1040800@oracle.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Zhigang Wang <zhigang.x.wang@oracle.com>
Cc: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org


--===============8657162756082680239==
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature";
	boundary="=-3Yx/a1xR1A2cLppRq7In"


--=-3Yx/a1xR1A2cLppRq7In
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, 2012-05-31 at 09:15 -0400, Zhigang Wang wrote:=20
> > We can and should. Are you able to send a patch for xl at least?
> >
> >
> Here is another case:
>=20
>     # xm info
>     ...
>     nr_cpus                : 48
>     nr_nodes               : 8
>     cores_per_socket       : 12
>     threads_per_core       : 1
>=20
> This HP BL685 G7 (4 socket x 12 cores).
>=20
> Actually sockets_per_node =3D 0.5. Xen calculates it correctly.
>=20
> Should we should s 0.5 for sockets_per_node? Or just ignore sockets_per_n=
ode?
>=20
I looked a bit into this and found out there has been some discussion
already on why such a "counter" (sockets_per_node) has been removed and
shouldn't be reintroduced, and those archs yielding fractional numbers
for it seem to be right that cause:

http://old-list-archives.xen.org/xen-changelog/2010-04/msg00074.html
http://old-list-archives.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2010-02/msg00005.h=
tml

Not sure what TheRightThing is here, just wanted to point these out...

Regards,
Dario

--=20
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://retis.sssup.it/people/faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)



--=-3Yx/a1xR1A2cLppRq7In
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAk/HeZkACgkQk4XaBE3IOsSO+QCcDwPc3JI+9YFudtNsfGNh2aFz
H7IAn1a91j+cyK4yzqgQE9pB3/KHDF6F
=IvKv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-3Yx/a1xR1A2cLppRq7In--



--===============8657162756082680239==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

--===============8657162756082680239==--