Re: /proc/cpuinfo format - arch dependent!

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Lennart Sorensen wrote:
On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 02:00:55PM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:

Linus did what was probably right then. I would agree that there is room for something better now. Just to prove it could be done (not that this is the only or best way):


I suspect many architecture's /proc/cpuinfo were not decided by Linus at
all, but by whoever ported linux to that architecture.


 cpu0 {
   socket: 0
   chip-cache: 0
   num-core: 2
   per-core-cache: 512k
   num-siblings: 2
   sibling-cache: 0
   family: i86
   features: sse2 sse3 xxs bvd
   # stepping and revision info
 }
 cpu1 {
   socket: 1
   chip-cache: 0
   num-core: 1
   pre-core-cache: 512k
   num-siblings: 2
   sibling-cache: 64k
   family: i86
   features: sse2 sse3 xxs bvd kook2
   # stepping and revision info
 }


Where does numa nodes fit into that?


This is just proof of concept, you can have per-chip, per-core, and per-sibling cache for instance, but I can't believe that anyone would make a chip where the cache per core or per sibling differed, or the instruction set, etc. Depending on where you buy your BS, Intel and AMD will (or won't) make single and dual core chips to fit the same socket.


Have you seen the Cell processor?  Multi core with different instruction
set for the smaller execution cores than the main one.

I'm aware of it, but until someone actually produces a multicore which executes the same instruction set (386+P4?) I assume that all the cores used by the program will be the same.

I wrote for the DEC Rainbow (8086 and Z80, one did disk and video, one did serial+net), and IIRC the memory addresses were shared but the IO addresses weren't. Also something I can't easily name which had a 68010 and 4 bit RISC in a single carrier. Early microcomputer days were fun, or at least I thought it was fun to cope with bizarre and unreliable hardware when I was young.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux