Samuel Thibault, le Mon 22 Nov 2010 17:33:15 +0100, a écrit :
> > -- using "p" is a good way to indicate "physical". But IIRC, we didn't like "l" (for "logical") because it looks too much like 1 (one).
> > I think we're open to having some kind of indication to denote "logical" instead of "physical" -- any suggestions? Perhaps P and L (vs. p and l)?
> P/L can be better than p/l, yes. Just "PU #0" is indeed probably not
> precise enough, and "PU L#0" will make people wonder why the L, and then
> understand why. I guess we can try to add this to an rc4.
Thinking again about it: can't we just switch only lstopo to physical
numbering by default, and only for the drawn part? The textual
output (lstopo -) displays both anyway. We wanted to use logical
numbering by default to be coherent with other hwloc tools, but the
graphical/semigraphical lstopo one is very particular (I hope nobody is
crazy enough to parse its output), and in almost all cases people will
want physical numbering by default, other cases can be obtained through
-l. I'd even say 1.0.3 should switch too (v0.9 was only using physical
numbering in lstopo).