Open MPI logo

Hardware Locality Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |  

This web mail archive is frozen.

This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.

You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails have been added to it since July of 2016.

Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.

Subject: Re: [hwloc-devel] Strange difference
From: Brice Goglin (Brice.Goglin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-26 17:35:07

Jeff Squyres wrote:
> On Mar 26, 2010, at 5:20 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>> That's still very large. We are going toward dozens of cores on each
>> sockets, we really need to keep them small :)
> Fair enough. How about still just keeping "P" in the graphic output, then? But "processor" in the prettyprint?

IIRC, somebody said "PU" (for "processing unit") could be a good
solution. Otherwise, I am ok with "Proc" or "Processor", with a small
preference for the former.

By the way, this is also what hwloc_type_string() would return. Unless
we keep it unchanged and just hack lstopo to use its own stringified
type name ?