From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Dec 9 22:41:19 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A11915120 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 22:41:13 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA14922 for ; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 07:41:10 +0100 (CET) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id HAA33897 for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 07:41:09 +0100 (MET) Received: from mercury.Sun.COM (mercury.Sun.COM [192.9.25.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C28A15176 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 22:40:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from michael.schuster@germany.sun.com) Received: from emuc05-home.Germany.Sun.COM ([129.157.51.10]) by mercury.Sun.COM (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA03424; Thu, 9 Dec 1999 22:40:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from germany.sun.com (hacker [129.157.167.97]) by emuc05-home.Germany.Sun.COM (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8/ENSMAIL,v1.7) with ESMTP id HAA13305; Fri, 10 Dec 1999 07:40:41 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <3850A077.CE3560A4@germany.sun.com> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 07:40:55 +0100 From: Michael Schuster - TSC SunOS Germany Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.8 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Chuck Robey Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Thread scheduling References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Chuck Robey wrote: > > In scheduling multiple threads on a FreeBSD SMP system, is it just > important that if a thread asks for multiple processors, then it can > contend for multiple processors, or is it in any way important that these > multiple instances of execution from the same memory space actually occur > at the same point in time. > > That is, is it important at all that all processors be doing the same > multithreading task (if it's multithreaded, and wants it) at exactly the > same time? The alternative would give it a multiple of the execution > time, but not be constrained at all to make those execution windows > overlap in time. two questions: a) what exactly would be the benefit of such an execution model, compared to what is done "normally" (i.e. explicit synchronisation of threads) b) how would you ever guarantee(sp?) anything like this? > Chuck Robey cheers Michael -- Michael Schuster / Michael.Schuster@germany.sun.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message