Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> 1) does the scheduler know enough to try to spread tasks
>> equally over both the pairs to make best use of the 16MB total
>> cache? (i.e. given cpu bound processes "1" and "2", if they
>> are both on CPU "A", then the "C-D" cache remains unused, but
>> keeping "1" on "a" and "2" on "C" would tend to minimize
>> their caches being consumed by each other.
>>
>
> yes this works just fine
>
>
>
>> 2) Since either A&B both have access to the 8MB cache, then
>> if a process was running on "A", it seems it would have a
>> low migration cost to be scheduled on "B" -- i.e. shouldn't
>> the process, if it were migrated to "A"'s "cache-mate", "B",
>> be able to benefit by any previous caching done on "A"?
>> If that's true, does the scheduler give preference, when
>> migrating a process, to a CPU's "cache-mate"?
>>
>
> afaik yes as well
>
>
You do have to enable "Multi-core scheduler support" in the kernel
.config, though.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
