Hello, Tollef Fog Heen, le Sat 01 Aug 2009 09:03:07 +0200, a écrit : > In the bug report, Samuel Thibault writes: > > parallel(1) says `The default is to run one job per CPU core.' but the > code shows parallel uses the result of sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN); > which doesn't give the number of cores, but the number of processors, > i.e. of threads in case the cores are multithreaded for instance. The > attached patch just removes the "core" word to leave just "CPU". > > I disagree with his patch, as in my case, it will be the number of > cores, but not the number of CPUs:
That's a problem of vocabulary. By "CPU", you actually mean "chip" or "socket", while I mean logical processors, as operating systems call it: when you look in the dmesg messages, you'll see CPU#0, CPU#1, etc. Using "core" is bogus is the case of hyperthreaded cores. "Processor" is another vague way to call that, as is used in /proc/cpuinfo. Yes, it could also be mistaken with "chip"/"socket" as well, it's a problem of vocabulary that has not been settled down yet. Operating Systems call them processors or CPUs, that's why I proposed to just keep "CPU", maybe "processor" could be better but I doubt it. "Logical processor" would be the precise wording but it could be confusing for the user... Samuel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
