[lkml]   [2001]   [Mar]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: linux scheduler limitations?

On 03.30 Fabio Riccardi wrote:
> Despite of all apparences this method performs beautifully on Linux, pthreads
> are
> actually slower in many cases, since you will incur some additional overhead
> due
> to thread synchronization and scheduling.

It all depends on your app, as every parallel algorithm. In a web-ftp-whatever
server, you do not need any synchro. You can start threads in free run and
let them die alone.

> The problem is that beyond a certain number of processes the scheduler just
> goes
> bananas, or so it seems to me.
> Since Linux threads are mapped on processes, I don't think that (p)threads
> woud
> help in any way, unless it is the VM context switch overhead that is playing a
> role here, which I wouldn't think is the case.

You said, 'mapped'.
AFAIK, that is the advantage, you can avoid the VM switch by sharing memory.

J.A. Magallon # Let the source # be with you, Luke...

Linux werewolf 2.4.2-ac28 #1 SMP Thu Mar 29 16:41:17 CEST 2001 i686

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 13:18    [W:0.043 / U:7.584 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site