Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:26:44 -0700 | From | Paul Jackson <> | Subject | Re: [Lse-tech] [PATCH] cpusets - big numa cpu and memory placement |
| |
Huertus wrote: > Paul, there are also other means for gang scheduling then having > to architect a tightly synchronized global clock into the communication > device.
We agree.
My reply to the post of Eric W. Biederman at the start of this sub-thread began:
> In the simplest form, we obtain the equivalent of gang scheduling for > the several threads of a tightly coupled job by arranging to have only > one runnable thread per cpu, each such thread pinned on one cpu, and all > threads in a given job simultaneously runnable. > > For compute bound jobs, this is often sufficient.
You reply adds substantial detail and excellent references.
Thank-you.
-- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.650.933.1373 - 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/
| |