[email protected] wrote:
On Sat, 07 Apr 2007 23:42:20 +0600, root said:
As we know that, linux scheduler use separate runqueue for every CPU of
a multiprocessor system, which having an active and an expired array.If
we use only one expired array, then the CPUs of a multiprocessor system
will be able to share their expired task via the accumulated expired
array,
I got this far, and the first thought that popped into my head was:
"Wow. This might actually win on a UP or small MP (2-15 CPU). But the
lock contention on a big 512-CPU machoflops box is likely going to *suck*".
For that matter, my quick eyeballing of the code, although it doesn't *find*
any race conditions, doesn't convince me there's any protection taken to make
sure there aren't any. Is there some subtle algorithmic trick I'm missing
to ensure Nothing Bad Can Happen?
Lock contention is going to be the least of your worries.
Destroying CPU affinity is the big one I suspect.
--
Politics is the struggle between those who want to make their country
the best in the world, and those who believe it already is. Each group
calls the other unpatriotic.
-
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]
