DMARC-Filter:	OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 delorie.com 52ABjwNN2725533
Authentication-Results:	delorie.com; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cygwin.com
Authentication-Results:	delorie.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cygwin.com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 delorie.com 52ABjwNN2725533
Authentication-Results:	delorie.com;
	dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=cygwin.com header.i=@cygwin.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=crhgUwaR
X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 4598B3858C5F
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cygwin.com;
	s=default; t=1741607157;
	bh=wHVlIGl/ep0xRfagbWqkq7HzGhgh2wV2m5cm2VV0dXE=;
	h=Subject:To:References:Date:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:
	List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc:
	From;
	b=crhgUwaRAkwcq3gUZH4+UyS9dbv3RXyREmeboksKClkTOiuJZTYHiTDJ3GhRlK/0K
	qY9YfJTl+4tpVvaqxWyxvmYpk/uaPkuVOh938S3Cl0BAyLUSF0u3xUIY/ver+otXvk
	+DQOL2+2g/lJcpyD5BkzLJfzhwABcfgNtBkoC+jM=
X-Original-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
DMARC-Filter:	OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 9C22D3858CD9
ARC-Filter:	OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 9C22D3858CD9
ARC-Seal:	i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1741607097; cv=none;
	b=R+k457c+k7UQrKEHy4OU1T7OipS5r9sI9/vTjgBRC/Oc5K5vS1RdoJn9RYj09RUkDQ7+oRkgWyb+hcCM20kkuyYuWbp5tBxLOUX4w8GCwoWZXyfaRTLis4H3wU46/l6P1BCKqUUWufD9sUQk0nKUkxOKTycmvgr4tiwprl4e7/g=
ARC-Message-Signature:	i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key;
	t=1741607097; c=relaxed/simple;
	bh=OHjzwo2Gn8t18yS82HTdFMoAZRiqE19SkPtgEKAGJkI=;
	h=Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version;
	b=VOJ4KPPEP/zj1b6gn9KxA+Jrj8limM8PGou1jq3YvRvLco8io8D/3ZQVN0BR8gHbiNvaClIIvW4rKh//uspdNTf904piZMHlLO2mKuia4smAOkB0kjM6WHBjOytVEQNuul3/yVWUdqEjtp1RPk/NW8TJQLX0a71LPG/Fnfe4On8=
ARC-Authentication-Results:	i=1; server2.sourceware.org
DKIM-Filter:	OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 9C22D3858CD9
Subject:	Re: sched_getaffinity() always returns the full cpu mask
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<378d90a0-bff5-36d1-d1f7-8a28e046af2a AT t-online DOT de>
	<e89e7440-553f-495d-95da-9ac7c7aa71dd AT maxrnd DOT com>
Message-ID:	<47cfcb1c-8c4d-b24d-a246-0091e4db2404@t-online.de>
Date:	Mon, 10 Mar 2025 12:44:55 +0100
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:128.0) Gecko/20100101
	SeaMonkey/2.53.20
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<e89e7440-553f-495d-95da-9ac7c7aa71dd@maxrnd.com>
X-TOI-EXPURGATEID:	150726::1741607095-E97F997D-37D84413/0/0 CLEAN NORMAL
X-TOI-MSGID:	d4a5cc55-a96d-4f24-ba28-7ec28f92b870
X-BeenThere:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Mailman-Version:	2.1.30
List-Id:	General Cygwin discussions and problem reports <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/options/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive:	<https://cygwin.com/pipermail/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe:	<https://cygwin.com/mailman/listinfo/cygwin>,
	<mailto:cygwin-request AT cygwin DOT com?subject=subscribe>
From:	Christian Franke via Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc:	Christian Franke <Christian DOT Franke AT t-online DOT de>
Errors-To:	cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com
Sender:	"Cygwin" <cygwin-bounces~archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from base64 to 8bit by delorie.com id 52ABjwNN2725533

Mark Geisert via Cygwin wrote:
> Hi Christian,
>
> On 3/8/2025 9:11 AM, Christian Franke via Cygwin wrote:
>> Testcase:
>>
>> $ grep processor /proc/cpuinfo | tail -1 # i7-14700K
>> processor       : 27
>>
>> $ sleep 60 & taskset 0x1 sleep 60 &
>> [1] 62094
>> [2] 62095
>>
>> $ taskset -p 62094
>> pid 62094's current affinity mask: fffffff
>>
>> $ taskset -p 62095
>> pid 62095's current affinity mask: fffffff
>
> This may well be the first test of Cygwin's affinity support on a 
> system where the cpu mask bit length isn't a power of 2.  I did test 
> such but seeing it on hardware is another matter.
>
> Are there in fact just 28 hardware processors on this system? ...

One physical cpu with 20 cores and 28 threads (i7-14700K: 8P/HT + 12E)

GetProcessAffinityMask(., ., &sysmask) returns sysmask=0xfffffff
GetProcessGroupAffinity(., &groupcount, grouparray) returns 
groupcount=1, grouparray[0] = 0

> ... Does Windows (or Linux for that matter) allow one to set cpu group 
> size?  I would think the BIOS would want control over that, with the 
> OSs just providing read access to what was chosen.  For 28 processors, 
> a single group of 28 processors, or either 4 groups of 7 procs, or 
> 7x4, or even 2x14 or 14x2 are plausible if not all useful.

I guess cpu groups are intended to reflect the physical cpus. I don't 
know whether this assignment could be changed.

-- 
Regards,
Christian


-- 
Problem reports:      https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                  https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:        https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:     https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -