I think both codes are equivalent and correct on this machine. hwloc_get_obj_by_type() returns logically-index ojects, that what's you want for consecutive binding. There's one hyperthread/PU per Core on your machine. So binding on core #3 is equivalent to binding on PU #3 (they should have the same cpusets here). No physical index is ever involved in this code.

If you ever want to support SMT machines as well:
* if you still want one process per core, use the code with HWLOC_OBJ_CORE
* if you want one process per hyperthread, use the code with HWLOC_OBJ_PU

Brice



Le 29/07/2011 13:33, Gabriele Fatigati a écrit :
Sorry, 

I forgot to tell you these code block is inside a parallel OpenMP region. This is the complete code:

#pragma omp parallel num_threads(6)
{
int tid = omp_get_thread_num();

hwloc_obj_t core = hwloc_get_obj_by_type(topology, HWLOC_OBJ_CORE, tid);
hwloc_cpuset_t set = hwloc_bitmap_dup(core->cpuset);
hwloc_bitmap_singlify(set);

hwloc_set_cpubind(topology, set,  HWLOC_CPUBIND_THREAD);

hwloc_bitmap_free(set);

}

and other code block is:

#pragma omp parallel num_threads(6)
{
int tid = omp_get_thread_num();

hwloc_obj_t core = hwloc_get_obj_by_type(topology, HWLOC_OBJ_PU, tid);
hwloc_cpuset_t set = hwloc_bitmap_dup(core->cpuset);
hwloc_bitmap_singlify(set);

hwloc_set_cpubind(topology, set,  HWLOC_CPUBIND_THREAD);

hwloc_bitmap_free(set);

}


The goal is physically bind threads as near as possible, one thread per core. Since core ids reported on  hwloc-hello.c are not consecutive and not exclusive, I suppose is better and more sure to use PU id. Or not?



2011/7/29 Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@inria.fr>
Gabriele Fatigati, le Fri 29 Jul 2011 13:24:17 +0200, a écrit :
> yhanks for yout quick reply!
>
> But i have a litte doubt. in a non SMT machine, Is it better use this:
>
> hwloc_obj_t core = hwloc_get_obj_by_type(topology, HWLOC_OBJ_CORE, tid);
> hwloc_cpuset_t set = hwloc_bitmap_dup(core->cpuset);
> hwloc_bitmap_singlify(set);
> hwloc_set_cpubind(topology, set,  HWLOC_CPUBIND_THREAD);
>
> or:
>
> hwloc_obj_t core = hwloc_get_obj_by_type(topology, HWLOC_OBJ_PU, tid);
> hwloc_cpuset_t set = hwloc_bitmap_dup(core->cpuset);
> hwloc_bitmap_singlify(set);
> hwloc_set_cpubind(topology, set,  HWLOC_CPUBIND_THREAD);
>
> because work in the same way( i suppose).

They'll both work about the same way on SMT too, since in the end it'll
pick up only one thread. Whether you want to assign threads to cores or
threads then depends on your application: do you want to let its threads
share a core or not.

Samuel
_______________________________________________
hwloc-users mailing list
hwloc-users@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-users



--
Ing. Gabriele Fatigati

Parallel programmer

CINECA Systems & Tecnologies Department

Supercomputing Group

Via Magnanelli 6/3, Casalecchio di Reno (BO) Italy

www.cineca.it                    Tel:   +39 051 6171722

g.fatigati [AT] cineca.it           

_______________________________________________
hwloc-users mailing list
hwloc-users@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/hwloc-users