Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines
Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.
REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
FS#50688 - [linux] not all cpus detected on KNL (simple fix included)
Attached to Project:
Arch Linux
Opened by Dimitar Pashov (dlp) - Wednesday, 07 September 2016, 07:41 GMT
Last edited by Tobias Powalowski (tpowa) - Friday, 09 September 2016, 07:46 GMT
Opened by Dimitar Pashov (dlp) - Wednesday, 07 September 2016, 07:41 GMT
Last edited by Tobias Powalowski (tpowa) - Friday, 09 September 2016, 07:46 GMT
|
DetailsDescription: The kernel is configured to recognise no more than 128 cpus (hwthreads) which is at least half of what the new socketed Xeon Phi x200 (Knights Landing) offers. Would you please increase CONFIG_NR_CPUS to 288?
Additional info: * linux-4.7+ and likely others * I have compiled a kernel with CONFIG_NR_CPUS=256 and it seems to be working OK. * KNL machines are single socket only so CONFIG_NR_CPUS does not need to go beyond 288 for the time being. Steps to reproduce: Boot a standard archlinux kernel on a KNL machine and notice how it only detects 128 cpus. |
This task depends upon
Closed by Tobias Powalowski (tpowa)
Friday, 09 September 2016, 07:46 GMT
Reason for closing: Won't implement
Friday, 09 September 2016, 07:46 GMT
Reason for closing: Won't implement
Intel suggests running stock RHEL kernel and has released a temporary rpm for CentOS since it lags behind a bit. I've looked through most KNL specific patches and they are upstreamed so Arch kernel shall be OK as a start. When I have time I'll look into making a special package but it might well be more hassle than it is worth. On the benchmarks I've run so far I did not see any difference CentOS vs Arch. There are a few other patched packages (hwloc, memkind, mcelog) which I'll have to investigate. Hopefully their patches end up upstream too.
With that said, you'd want to run Arch 'on such a beast' for some of the reasons you'd want to run it on a desktop or laptop.
Each supported CPU needs memory and I don't know how apic and interrupts are affected on smaller systems by bumping it too high.
Better you compile your own kernel for now.