Re: [RFC] Scheduler queue implementation ...

From: Rik van Riel (riel@conectiva.com.br)
Date: Thu Dec 20 2001 - 16:42:05 EST


On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Pavel Machek wrote:

> > > Alan, you're mixing switch mm costs with cache image reload ones.
> > > Note that equal mm does not mean matching cache image, at all.
> >
> > They are often close to the same thing. Take a look at the constraints
> > on virtually cached processors like the ARM where they _are_ the same thing.
> >
> > Equal mm for cpu sucking tasks often means equal cache image. On the
>
> Really?
>
> I'd guess that if cpu-bound software wants to use clone(CLONE_VM) to
> gain some performance, it should better work "mostly" in different
> memory areas on different cpus... But I could be wrong.

I guess you never used xmms or mozilla, then ;)

(where threads seem to be used for different stages of
processing data ... not sure about mozilla)

regards,

Rik

-- 
DMCA, SSSCA, W3C?  Who cares?  http://thefreeworld.net/

http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/

- 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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 23 2001 - 21:00:23 EST