lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Dec]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] 2.6.0 batch scheduling, HT aware
Date
In article <200312272215.01563.kernel@kolivas.org>,
Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org> wrote:
| On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 22:09, Pavel Machek wrote:
| > So... even on normal SMP,
| > "task-on-other-cpu-slows-down-task-on-this-cpu" effect exists. Okay,
| > it is not as visible as on HT machine (50% slowdown), but its
| > definitely there.
|
| Sure but I think we're getting pedantic here. The problem is really simple - a
| uniprocessor HT desktop booted in SMP mode feels half the speed while running
| setiathome (or video encoding or whatever cpu bound task) compared to booting
| it in UP mode. So, ironically, enabling the HT makes the machine feel slower
| when running multiple tasks. And there will be a heck of a lot of these in
| the future.

Let me put forth a thought, without a solution. In the case you
describe, what is needed, and not provided in hardware, is a way to do
priority within the CPU, so in the case of a contested resource there is
a way to ensure the process we wish wins.

Since that seems unavailable in Intel, do other CPUs do better (or
different)?
--
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 13:59    [W:0.078 / U:0.492 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site