Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 30 Sep 2004 12:39:12 +1000 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: processor affinity |
| |
Jeff V. Merkey wrote: > Alan Cox wrote: > >> On Maw, 2004-09-28 at 17:02, Jeff V. Merkey wrote: >> >> >>>>> http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/search-bool.html&r=2&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=ptxt&s1=merkey.INZZ.&OS=IN/merkey&RS=IN/merkey >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Wow, I never knew about that. >>>> >>>> But guess who wrote the affinity system calls? :) >>>> >> >> >> >> >>> I wrote them first, and coined the term. >> >> >> Cute but GCOS3 had affinity syscalls for batch processing in the 1970's >> and I don't believe it was original even then. >> >> > > Using them for Intel Cache affinity was new at the time. Intel SMP > hardware was not readily available at the time and was in > its infancy in 1993 when this was developed.
That is amazingly specific - I suppose using it for cache affinity on earlier processors wouldn't count :)
Joking aside, this doesn't seem like it would apply to Linux's scheduler. We don't use a global queue, and we don't implement hard affinities with local queues, but with a specific bitmask of cpus.
Of course, I don't really have any idea how to interpret patents... - 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/
| |