Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 4 Dec 2001 19:25:01 -0800 (PST) | From | Davide Libenzi <> | Subject | Re: SMP/cc Cluster description |
| |
On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> > Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:36:46 -0800 > > OK, so start throwing stones at this. Once we have a memory model that > works, I'll go through the process model. > > What is the difference between your messages and spin locks? > Both seem to shuffle between cpus anytime anything interesting > happens. > > In the spinlock case, I can thread out the locks in the page cache > hash table so that the shuffling is reduced. In the message case, I > always have to talk to someone.
Time ago I read an interesting article that implemented shared memory over network ( ATM in that case ) reproducing in large scale the cache/memory/bus computer architecture. Shared memory on each node was the equivalent of the CPU cache, a "generic shared memory repository" was the equivalent of the main memory and the snooping traffic was running on the network. I think I picked it up from ACM but I can't find it right now.
- Davide
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |