From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Mar 20 00:54:16 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB42438F;
 Fri, 20 Mar 2015 00:54:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-yk0-x231.google.com (mail-yk0-x231.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::231])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 895693B0;
 Fri, 20 Mar 2015 00:54:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by ykfc206 with SMTP id c206so35432765ykf.1;
 Thu, 19 Mar 2015 17:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:sender:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
 bh=PUTkHMZs+aQxKAJhEJQVZMoxOfSzoO82jn3vaLBkKV0=;
 b=npdz8daGNNDgQ2/WU+6iLAt+gnM3gNfzokYAM0ihOX73ZOu8VzMX6cgNUF7N4OGOhh
 0NNDo/vCAmFboOZEkQikCYN0s8xjVvJYXUNiHs3+/ojAHqXX9QQFyMiwP0dqLNff66zO
 ybLiBiaTotuUWlZK0WcSl5TYs2mT85ZjPQA0Drhv4DSdmKog/ODBuyKy39CntZgRjtQt
 Zr1L+n+92UbaoiWjPjEi1XyqHwMo8HhAbbYcR0EzJXIKpm/KYqaxZL/0/rKN513H9zPR
 6CrnUw5Ih7Q5rTwLhalXevvl0gNouPsG9YW2wroKjXE27a9ZoyDd70mvcJu3u2WfXkX6
 HZKw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.236.53.66 with SMTP id f42mr81712838yhc.92.1426812855687;
 Thu, 19 Mar 2015 17:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: kmacybsd@gmail.com
Received: by 10.170.205.193 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Mar 2015 17:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 17:54:15 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: -a08iDtYgFJMxnVZVAmDkHamcWQ
Message-ID: <CAHM0Q_NRg9b4ZG5cLLO94mzaSWgz0k=TvjdyZffKG6QtNuopLA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: LOCAL_CPUS vs INTR_CPUS
From: "K. Macy" <kmacy@freebsd.org>
To: "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>,
 John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 00:54:16 -0000

I haven't been able to get an answer out of the usual suspects so I
thought I'd ask here.

In reference to:
https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/compare/master...bsdjhb:numa_bus_get_cpus


The LOCAL_CPUS option will return the cpuset corresponding to the NUMA
(_pxm) domain id of a given device. INTR_CPUS can narrow that further.
However, in this particular branch INTR_CPUS will only ever return the
value given by LOCAL_CPUS. When and where would this come in to
effect? Do the new Haswells have cores in the same memory domain but
with non-uniform access to the PCIe bus?

Thanks.