lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jul]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRE: Wrong CPU count
On Fri, 19 Jul 2002, Richard B. Johnson wrote:

> On Fri, 19 Jul 2002 venom@sns.it wrote:
>
> >
> > yes, as bios option.
> >
> > On my point of view it would be interesting to verify is hyperthreading is
> > really usefull or not.
> >
>
> It would be interesting to determine if "hyperthreading" in the CPU
> actually exists. It may just be an artifact of dual instruction units,
> actually a defect (perhaps harmless), that is hyped as a feature.

Clearly not, it requires another set of registers including instruction
counter.

> For instance, it has long been known that if a CPU were to have as
> many instruction units as possible instruction branches, program
> jumps upon logical conditions would not slow the machine down. The
> hardware just continues using the instruction unit that contains the
> correct program-flow while the others are re-loaded.

That is not correct, it certainly can slow the machine down. Speculative
execution is used, but it's not free, since it requires fetching
instructions not used through a limited bandwidth to memory. Much on this
in comp.arch, there is a tradeoff between avoiding stalls and causing
them, separate branch target cache, etc. Details probably a lot better to
be discussed there.

--
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:27    [W:0.040 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site