On Wed, Jun 09, 1999 at 09:53:19PM -0400, Eugene Kuznetsov wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 09, 1999 9:15 PM, Robert M. Hyatt
> I know, that was the point. You obviously view this as a plus. If one is
> doing heavy-duty processing or data-crunching, this is often a good thing.
> However, it is not *always* a good thing. If I want to spin a little logo
> in the corner of an app's window, a thread is the simplest way of doing so.
> Should this thread be running on the 2nd CPU, dragging the app's
> instructions and data into its cache, too? It's no longer so
> black-n-white, it starts getting complicated.
does that mean that two threads working on the same data are thrashing each
other out of the processor cache?
I thought of something like this:
pseudo code:
thread 1 is doing this:
for(int i=0;i<n;++n)
sum[i] = a[i] + b[i];
while thread 2 is doing this:
for(int i=0;i<n;++n)
diff[i] = a[i] - b[i];
are these threads trashing a and b out of the processor cache or is the
read only access OK?
Joerg
--
Ich habe eine Menge Geld fuer Sauferei, leichte Maedchen und schnelle Autos
ausgegeben. Den Rest habe ich einfach verplempert.
George Best
-
Linux SMP list: FIRST see FAQ at http://www.irisa.fr/prive/mentre/smp-faq/
To Unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe linux-smp" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
