Open MPI logo

Hardware Locality Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Hardware Locality Development mailing list

Subject: Re: [hwloc-devel] CPUBIND flags when getting proc/thread affinity
From: Jeff Squyres (jsquyres_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-09-24 08:12:03


Thanks!

How's this? https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/hwloc/changeset/3852

On Sep 20, 2011, at 8:57 AM, Brice Goglin wrote:

> Le 20/09/2011 14:44, Jeff Squyres a écrit :
>> 1. Is it permissible to use _PROCESS or _THREAD with get_proc_last_cpu_location() and get_proc_cpubind()? I'm thinking that it doesn't make sense to use _THREAD here, and using _PROCESS would be redundant.
>
> That's almost true. Except that Linux has this notion of "tid" to
> identify single threads. So if you pass THREAD with a thread id, you end
> up doing get_cpubind/get_last_location on the corresponding single
> thread (without having to use a pthread_t).
>
> This is Linux-specific corner case, sometimes useful, but maybe not
> required in the doc?
>
>
>> 2. Is it permissible to use _PROCESS or _THREAD with get_last_cpu_location() and get_cpubind()?
>
> It's OK.
>
>> 3. Is it permissible to use _NOMEMBIND with any of these 4 functions? I'm guessing that it's meaningless. Should we document that this flag will be ignored, or that it is erroneous to use?
>
> This flag is meaningless and ignored there.
>
> Brice
>
> _______________________________________________
> hwloc-devel mailing list
> hwloc-devel_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-devel

-- 
Jeff Squyres
jsquyres_at_[hidden]
For corporate legal information go to:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/