Alex,
> >> If it's the latter, we could just have ppc64_cpu --smt=x also set the
> >> subcore amount in parallel to the thread count.
> > FWIW on powernv we just nap the threads on hotplug.
> >
> >> The reason I'm bringing this up is that I'm not quite sure who would be
> >> the instance doing the
On 23.05.14 12:11, Michael Neuling wrote:
Also, is there any performance penalty associated with split core mode?
If not, could we just always default to split-by-4 on POWER8 bare metal?
Yeah, there is a performance hit . When you are split (ie
subcores_per_core = 2 or 4), the core is stuck in
> >> Also, is there any performance penalty associated with split core mode?
> >> If not, could we just always default to split-by-4 on POWER8 bare metal?
> > Yeah, there is a performance hit . When you are split (ie
> > subcores_per_core = 2 or 4), the core is stuck in SMT8 mode. So if you
> > o
On 23.05.14 12:00, Michael Neuling wrote:
On Fri, 2014-05-23 at 11:53 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 23.05.14 10:15, Michael Neuling wrote:
This patch series implements split core mode on POWER8. This enables up to 4
subcores per core which can each independently run guests (per guest SPRs l
On Fri, 2014-05-23 at 11:53 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On 23.05.14 10:15, Michael Neuling wrote:
> > This patch series implements split core mode on POWER8. This enables up to
> > 4
> > subcores per core which can each independently run guests (per guest SPRs
> > like
> > SDR1, LPIDR etc are
On 23.05.14 10:15, Michael Neuling wrote:
This patch series implements split core mode on POWER8. This enables up to 4
subcores per core which can each independently run guests (per guest SPRs like
SDR1, LPIDR etc are replicated per subcore). Lots more documentation on this
feature in the code
