Re: [PATCH 2/6] sched: rework of sched_domain topology definition

[Dietmar Eggemann]

On 11/03/14 13:27, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On 11 March 2014 11:31, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
> 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/