> shame that the msvc (and subsequently mingw) does a > #define MAXIMUM_PROCESSORS 32 > it seems these days that limits are meant to be broken,
That #define certainly does not mean that code built with mingw (or msvc) would be limited to running threads on a maximum of 32 concurrent processors, if that is what you think... As far as I can see, that value is just a magic value to the SetThreadIdleProcessor() function, it has no other meaning. So the only thing it limits is that you can't set the preferred processor of a thread to be processor number 32, but you can set it to be any of processors 0..31 and 33..n . Hardly that significant. And actually, the docs for SetThreadIdealProcessor() says: "On a system with more than 64 processors, this function sets the preferred processor to a logical processor in the processor group to which the calling thread is assigned. Use the SetThreadIdealProcessorEx function to specify a processor group and preferred processor." > limit there is about to be broken sometime soon I should think... it's > already up to 8 with the intel i7. :-) There has been (quite expensive and thus quite rare) machines running Windows with many more processors than 8 long before there were x86 *chips* with multiple *cores*. Don't confuse cores with processors. Multiple processors is a much older concept than multiple cores. --tml ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Mingw-w64-public mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
