From owner-freebsd-smp Mon Jul 2 12:11:16 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from sneakerz.org (sneakerz.org [216.33.66.254]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A21C537B406 for ; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 12:11:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bright@sneakerz.org) Received: by sneakerz.org (Postfix, from userid 1092) id 5000E5D010; Mon, 2 Jul 2001 14:11:13 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2001 14:11:13 -0500 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Julian Elischer Cc: "Michael C . Wu" , "E.B. Dreger" , smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: per cpu runqueues, cpu affinity and cpu binding. Message-ID: <20010702141113.Q84523@sneakerz.org> References: <20010702115044.C99436@peorth.iteration.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from julian@elischer.org on Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 01:19:04PM -0700 Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org * Julian Elischer [010702 13:38] wrote: > > At USENIX we decided to proceed with the KSE work. yay! > I have already re-implemented the proc-splitting patches from January and > have split the proc structure into parts to support threads. In this case > teh processor affinity stuff that alfred has done are already in a > per-thread (per kse) basis. Individual threads may migrate between KSEs > but if teh program acts to implement KSEs (thread carriers) on multiple > processors then they will try STAY on particular processors. > > As a side issue I plan on NOT ALLOWING multiple KSEs (thread carriers?) > from the same thread group in the same process to be on the same > processor. SO load balancing and processor affinity will not > apply to the thread-carrying entities (KSEs). Of course the userland > thread scheduler has the ultimate say as to which processor > a thread is scheduled on. Actually, this may cause some performance problems, when you have a shared address space you can avoid tlb shootdowns when a process's address space changes, you also share the cache, lastly there's some rumor about a new CPU archetecture that runs multple threads on the same CPU at the same time. Just food for thought. -- -Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org] Ok, who wrote this damn function called '??'? And why do my programs keep crashing in it? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message