On Jun 7, 2010, at 12:15 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Wheeler, Kyle Bruce, le Mon 07 Jun 2010 10:10:04 -0600, a écrit :
>> As I'm sure you know, while Apple doesn't provide strict "bind to CPU X"
>> functions, they do at least (on Leopard and later) provide the ability to
>> associate tasks/threads together (or explicitly disassociate them).
>
> Yes, it's an interesting interface.
>
>> Would it be a good idea to support these as some sort of make-do? Or would
>> it simply prompt too many complaints along the lines of "hey, I said bind to
>> cpu 0 and my program ran on cpu 3! what gives?!?"
>
> But how would that work? There is no relation with cpus in that
> interface.
True; but you can make each "cpu" a thread set ID. This is easier to explain in
code:
void set_affinity(int cpu) {
mach_msg_type_number_t count = 1;
thread_affinity_policy_data_t mask[THREAD_AFFINITY_POLICY_COUNT];
memset(mask, 0, sizeof(mask));
mask[0].affinity_tag = cpu+1;
thread_policy_set(mach_thread_self(), THREAD_AFFINITY_POLICY,
(thread_policy_t) &mask, count);
}
--
Kyle B. Wheeler, PhD
Dept. 1423: Scalable System Software
Sandia National Laboratories
