On 20-12-18, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 12:49:59PM +0100, Baptiste Jonglez via cfarm-users
> wrote:
> > So, I just added pretty usage bars [1] to the list of machine :)
>
> Thanks. But maybe it should be presented differently?
>
> The page now is much too wide to fit on a screen, and those little bars
> are all jumbled around, so it is hard to get information from this. The
> links ("CPU graphs etc.) distract a lot from the information in that
> column, too.Hmm yes, I'm not an expert in web design, to say the least… I have reduced the text size a bit, it should be better now! > I normally use > lscfg -vp | grep proc > (no idea how good *that* is, but it does the job). > > gcc111 is 12 cores, 48 threads; gcc119 is 16 cores, 128 threads. Thanks, I have updated the page. I assume both have 2 sockets? > > I realize now that "CPU" vs "cores" is a simplistic distinction for some > > machines. I tend to take the definition "CPU = physical socket" but that > > sounds incorrect for the aarch64 machines: do they really have 8 CPU > > sockets as reported by lscpu? Or is it just that each core has its own L3 > > cache so it can be considered to be an independent CPU? > > Many people use cpu = core. Linux uses cpu = thread. Some people use > cpu = die; and some (like you) use cpu = package (not everyone has sockets). > > L3 cache topology does not have much to do with cpu topology. I see, thanks for the explanation. Baptiste
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ cfarm-users mailing list cfarm-users@lists.tetaneutral.net https://lists.tetaneutral.net/listinfo/cfarm-users
