On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:17:46 +0100 (BST)
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com> wrote:

quoted text
> One point worth noting - is it a worry?  Prior to that smpboot merge,
> my Xeon booted the two HT siblings on one physical first, then the
> two siblings on the other physical after - when i386, but alternated
> them when x86_64.  Since the merge, the x86_64 sequence is unchanged,
> but the i386 sequence is now like x86_64.  I prefer this consistency,
> and I prefer the new sequence: booting with maxcpus=2 then uses the
> independent physicals without HT sharing; but surprises in store?
> 

this is how it always was supposed to be!
At least this is how Intel specifies it to the BIOS vendors (but remember, it's the bios
that pretty much sets the cpu order; some will be weird).

Exactly for the maxcpus=2 reason... (and for systems where the cpu scheduler does 
load balancing "from 0 up" it also makes sense)
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/