[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87o7jaf8b1.ffs@tglx>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2023 08:26:58 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: "Zhang, Rui" <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: "Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
"Gross, Jurgen" <jgross@...e.com>,
"mikelley@...rosoft.com" <mikelley@...rosoft.com>,
"arjan@...ux.intel.com" <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"thomas.lendacky@....com" <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
"ray.huang@....com" <ray.huang@....com>,
"andrew.cooper3@...rix.com" <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
"Sivanich, Dimitri" <dimitri.sivanich@....com>,
"wei.liu@...nel.org" <wei.liu@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch V3 23/40] x86/cpu: Provide cpu_init/parse_topology()
On Sat, Aug 12 2023 at 08:00, Rui Zhang wrote:
> On Sat, 2023-08-12 at 14:38 +0800, Zhang Rui wrote:
> BTW, can we consider using system wide unique core_id instead?
>
> There are a couple of advantages by using this.
> CC Len, who can provide detailed justifications for this.
I have no problem with that. But as I said before we need a discussion
about the ID representation in general so it becomes a consistent view
at all levels.
The other thing to think about is whether we really need all these IDs
explicitly stored in cpu_info::topo... The vast majority of usage sites
is in some slow path (setup, cpu hotplug, proc, sysfs ...).
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists