Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 9 Oct 2006 07:39:45 +0800
From:      David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org>
To:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Cc:        Kip Macy <kmacy@fsmware.com>, Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr>
Subject:   Re: [PATCH] MAXCPU alterable in kernel config - needs testers
Message-ID:  <200610090739.45433.davidxu@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20061008155350.L29803@demos.bsdclusters.com>
References:  <2fd864e0610080423q7ba6bdeal656a223e662a5d@mail.gmail.com> <4529667D.8070108@fer.hr> <20061008155350.L29803@demos.bsdclusters.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 09 October 2006 06:55, Kip Macy wrote:
> > Any word on how will they handle migration of threads across sockets (or
> > will it be OS's job)? Judging from T1 architecture, I think such event
> > would create a very large performance penalty, but I'm not an expert.
>
> It is the job of the OS to take locality into account in thread
> scheduling. Moving between chips You'll just lose the L2 cache locality
> just as you would on a normal SMP.
>
>
> 			-Kip
Current MD code does not provide useful CPU topology data structure,
it is impossible to write a locality aware scheduler for sun4v and other
NUMA architectures.

David Xu



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200610090739.45433.davidxu>