[PATCH v7 13/13] arm64: topology: divorce MC scheduling domain from core_siblings
From: Brice Goglin <hidden>
Date: 2018-03-08 20:41:17
Also in:
linux-acpi, linux-riscv, lkml
From: Brice Goglin <hidden>
Date: 2018-03-08 20:41:17
Also in:
linux-acpi, linux-riscv, lkml
Is there a good reason for diverging instead of adjusting the core_sibling mask? On x86 the core_siblings mask is defined by the last level cache span so they don't have this issue.
No. core_siblings is defined as the list of cores that have the same physical_package_id (see the doc of sysfs topology files), and LLC can be smaller than that. Example with E5v3 with cluster-on-die (two L3 per package, core_siblings is twice larger than L3 cpumap): https://www.open-mpi.org/projects/hwloc/lstopo/images/2XeonE5v3.v1.11.png On AMD EPYC, you even have up to 8 LLC per package. Brice