[lkml]   [2003]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Minutes from Feb 21 LSE Call
Mark Hahn wrote:
>>OK, so now you've slid from talking about PCs to 2-way to 4-way ...
>>perhaps because your original arguement was fatally flawed.
> oh, come on. the issue is whether memory is fast and flat.
> most "scalability" efforts are mainly trying to code around the fact
> that any ccNUMA (and most 4-ways) is going to be slow/bumpy.
> it is reasonable to worry that optimizations for imbalanced machines
> will hurt "normal" ones. is it worth hurting uni by 5% to give
> a 50% speedup to IBM's 32-way? I think not, simply because
> low-end machines are more important to Linux.
> the best way to kill Linux is to turn it into an OS best suited
> for $6+-digit machines.

Linux has a key feature that most other OS's lack: It can (easily, and by all)
be recompiled for a particular architecture. So, there is no particular reason why
optimizing for a high-end system has to kill performance on uni-processor

For instance, don't locks simply get compiled away to nothing on
uni-processor machines?

Ben Greear <> <Ben_Greear AT>
President of Candela Technologies Inc

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 13:33    [W:0.144 / U:0.912 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site