lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Sep]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Interesting scheduling times - NOT
On Mon, 21 Sep 1998, David S. Miller wrote:
> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 16:39:07 +1000
> From: Richard Gooch <rgooch@atnf.csiro.au>
>
> Yes, you're right. I've reordered some members of struct
> task_struct and I've been able to take the cost of extra processes
>
> I did all these cache tricks on the Ultra once as an experiment, a
> machine where it should matter a lot. It was all lost in the noise,

How would this tricks influence performance on machines with
a high CPU/bandwidth ratio and/or simple caches (ie. PPC,
some MIPSen, ARM and some Alphas)?

I guess that on a fast CPU with less memory bandwidth the
effect will be more noticable... And since it looks like
some people have already coded it, there shouldn't be any
harm in putting it inside the kernel ;)

Rik.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Linux memory management tour guide. H.H.vanRiel@phys.uu.nl |
| Scouting Vries cubscout leader. http://www.phys.uu.nl/~riel/ |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:44    [W:0.051 / U:0.108 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site