[lkml]   [2001]   [Dec]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: SMP/cc Cluster description
    At 06:36 PM 12/4/01 -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
    >What is the difference between your messages and spin locks?
    >Both seem to shuffle between cpus anytime anything interesting
    >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.

    While what I'm about to say has little bearing on the SMP/cc case: one
    significant advantage of messages over spinlocks is being able to assign
    priority with low overhead in the quick-response real-time multi-CPU
    arena. I worked with a cluster of up to 14 CPUs using something very much
    like NUMA in which task scheduling used a set of prioritized message
    queues. The system I worked on was designed to break transaction-oriented
    tasks into a string of "work units" each of which could be processed very
    quickly -- on the order of three milliseconds or less. (The limit of 14
    CPUs was set by the hardware used to implement the main system bus.)

    I bring this up only because I have never seen a spinlock system that dealt
    with priority issues very well when under heavy load.

    OK, I've said my piece, now I'll sit back and continue to watch your


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:13    [W:0.023 / U:109.536 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site