On 20.02.2005, at 23:47, <[EMAIL PROTECTED] ( Marc) (A.) (Lehmann )> wrote:
Linux will not keep two threads running on a single cpu if both are ready
and nothing else is running, regardless of locality etc., as the kernel
lacks the tools to effectively decide wether threads should stay on a cpu
Yes and no. I just figured out that the tools I were looking for are called schedutils and can be used to change the affinity settings of a process, i.e. pin it to some CPU or allow it to migrate as the kernel decides between a set of CPUs.
Forcing the NPTL implementation to degrade to legacy pthreads means that one thread equals one process and thus can be controlled with taskset.
Oh yes, and I just noticed that now this isn't even necessary anymore because for some reason the kernel now migrates on of the pthread processes to the other CPU automatically after a short while of processing.
(I mean, it's of course bad to interlave operations on a per-pixel basis
instead of e.g. a per-tile basis, but the kernel will run the threads
concurrently wether or not it gets slower).
Certainly. Opterons are bandwidth monsters but this doesn't mean that they'll be forgiving to stupid algorithms.
That's quite possible, but IFF the kernel indeed keeps the two threads on
a single cpu then it means that both aren't ready at the same time, e.g.
due to lock contention or other things.
I can force it to use both CPUs now, but even with 200% utilization it is 2s slower to run this stupid ubenchmark than on 1 CPU without threads.
Description: This is a digitally signed message part