On Tue, 18 Jun 2002, Cort Dougan wrote:
>
> I agree with you there. It's not easy, and I'd claim it's not possible
> given that no-one has done it yet, to have a select() call that is speedy
> for both 0-10 and 1k file descriptors.
Actually, select() scales a lot better than poll() for _dense_ bitmaps.
The problem with non-scalability ends up being either sparse bitmaps
(minor problem, poll() can help) or just the work involved in watching a
large number of fd's (major problem, but totally unrelated to the bitmap
itself, and poll() usually makes it worse thanks to more data to be
moved).
Anyway, I was talking about the scalability of the _data_structure_, not
the scalability performance-wise. Performance scalability is a non-issue
for something like setaffinity(), since it's just not called at any rate
approaching poll.
>From a data structure standpoint, bitmaps are clearly the simplest dense
representation, and scale perfectly well to any reasonable number of
CPU's.
If we end up using a default of 1024, maybe you'll have to recompile that
part of the system that has anything to do with CPU affinity in about
10-20 years by just upping the number a bit. Quite frankly, that's going
to be the _least_ of the issues.
Linus
-
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 Jun 23 2002 - 22:00:17 EST