Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:01:39 +0200 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r191405 - in head/sys: amd64/amd64 i386/i386 Message-ID: <9bbcef730904230501k26197958tb78d88958bd20654@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0904231253140.54334@fledge.watson.org> References: <200904222140.n3MLebn3068260@svn.freebsd.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0904231253140.54334@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2009/4/23 Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>: > Do you have any ideas about ways to usefully represent and manage concept= s > like "pick a close CPU" or "the set of CPUs that are close"? =C2=A0For ex= ample, > if I have available a flow identifier, hashing to one of a set of availab= le > CPUs is easy, but what would you suggest as an efficient representation t= o > hash from a set of close available CPUs rather than the entire pool? Excuse me if I'm missing the point but isn't this already done by ULE and for almost the same reasons? Shouldn't the scheduler (or its topology infrastructure if it's separated from the scheduler) be the best place to do it?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9bbcef730904230501k26197958tb78d88958bd20654>