Thanks for your responses W dniu niedziela, 8 kwietnia 2018 14:51:52 UTC+2 użytkownik John Hening napisał: > > Hello, > > I've read about thread affinity and I see that it is popular in > high-performance-libraries (for example > https://github.com/OpenHFT/Java-Thread-Affinity). Ok, jugglery a thread > between cores has impact (generally) on performance so it is reasonable to > bind a specific thread to a specific core. > > *Intro*: > It is obvious that the best idea to make it possible that any process will > be an owner of core [let's call it X] (in multi-core CPU). I mean that main > thread in a process will be one and only thread executed on core X. So, > there is no problem with context-switching and cache flushing [with expect > system calls]. > I know that it requires a special implementation of scheduler in kernel, > so it requires a modification of [Linux] kernel. I know that it is not so > easy and so on. > > *Question*: > But, we know that we have systems that need a high performance. So, it > could be a solution with context-switching once and at all. So, why there > is no a such solution? My suspicions are: > > * it is pointless, the bottleneck is elsewhere [However, it is meaningful > to get thread-affinity] > * it is too hard and there is too risky to make it not correctly > * there is no need > * forking own linux kernel doesn't sound like a good idea. > > >
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mechanical-sympathy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mechanical-sympathy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
