Stephen C. Tweedie:
> That's why if you have a background task and two interactive tasks on a
> 2-CPU machine, you really cannot avoid the background task jumping
> between CPUs unless you are willing to leave a CPU idle at times (and
> that, in general, is a very bad thing to do.)
Yea, that's what the comments in sched.c say as well. But I
seriously doubt that. Letting the background process jump pollutes the
caches. That hurts more than letting the interactive process pass and
keep the background process once asleep to wait for its home cpu. The
affinity patch seems to be winner here. Didn't try it jet ;)
Micha.
-- -- Michael Schulz, NatS - Uni Hamburg- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 31 2000 - 21:00:29 EST