Re: [CFT][RFC] HT scheduler
From: Nick Piggin
Date: Thu Dec 11 2003 - 11:43:22 EST
Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
Nick Piggin wrote:
http://www.kerneltrap.org/~npiggin/w26/
Against 2.6.0-test11
This includes the SMT description for P4. Initial results shows
comparable
performance to Ingo's shared runqueue's patch on a dual P4 Xeon.
Is there any value in testing/using this on a single CPU P4-HT system,
or is it only targeted at multi-CPU systems?
Yes hopefully there is value in it. Its probably very minor, but it
recognises there is no cache penalty when moving between virtual CPUs,
so it should be able to keep them busy more often.
As I said it would be very minor.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/