"sched_setaffinity: Invalid argument"?

[LaurV]

I am using an app to control cpu/gpu frequencies and to show temperatures in a 10-core CPU on ubuntu. It is also called "core-ctl-something" (note, I am not at home right now to check, and generally I am a linux noob, only using it in some mining rig because mining is faster, R-vii windows drivers suck) - anyhow, maybe this info helps somehow, or give somebody some idea: on the chart which shows the cores' temps, the cores are numbered 0,1,2,3,4,8,9,10,11,12. Don't ask me why...
(edit, it looks indeed like a crippled 16-cores CPU, or maybe it is like that, internally).

[ewmayer]

Originally Posted by LaurV

I am using an app to control cpu/gpu frequencies and to show temperatures in a 10-core CPU on ubuntu. It is also called "core-ctl-something" (note, I am not at home right now to check, and generally I am a linux noob, only using it in some mining rig because mining is faster, R-vii windows drivers suck) - anyhow, maybe this info helps somehow, or give somebody some idea: on the chart which shows the cores' temps, the cores are numbered 0,1,2,3,4,8,9,10,11,12. Don't ask me why...
(edit, it looks indeed like a crippled 16-cores CPU, or maybe it is like that, internally).

The OP's case is different in that his /proc/cpuinfo shows core numbers 0-7, as expected. But yes, especially Intel sometimes uses utterly bizarre internal numbering - I've integrated the hwloc package into the current Mlucas dev-branch to automatically handle such weirdness. The command-line version of hwloc is, oddly, named 'lstopo' - attached is its visual rendering of the topology for another Intel chip, a 61c244t Knights Corner copro CPU - in the rendering, the grey-shaded "Core L#--" entries are physical cores, "P#--" are the attached logical cores in Intel's numbering (the one which is used to generate the /proc/cpuinfo data), and "PU L#--" are the hwloc-reindexed logical cores. Check out Intel's numbering of the 4 logical cores mapped to physical core 0, for instance: