>
>
>
> Original Message
>From: s...@hardwarefreak.com
>To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>Subject: Re: Debian stock kernel config -- CONFIG_NR_CPUS=32?
>Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2010 12:13:06 -0500
>
>>ow...@netptc.net put forth on 10/22/2010 8:15 PM:
>>
Ron Johnson put forth on 10/22/2010 8:48 PM:
> Bah, humbug.
>
> Instead of a quad-core at lower GHz, I just got my wife a dual-core at
> higher speed.
Not to mention the fact that for desktop use 2 higher clocked cores will
yield faster application performance (think of the single threaded Flash
ow...@netptc.net put forth on 10/22/2010 8:15 PM:
> Actually Amdahl's Law IS a law of diminishing returns but is intended
> to be applied to hardware, not software. The usual application is to
> compute the degree to which adding another processor increases the
> processing power of the system
>
On 10/22/2010 07:08 PM, Andrew Reid wrote:
On Friday 22 October 2010 03:22:02 Sven Joachim wrote:
On 2010-10-22 03:15 +0200, Andrew Reid wrote:
I recently deployed some new many-core servers at work, with
48 cores each (4x 12 core AMD 6174s), and ran into an issue where
the stock Debian kern
>
>
>
> Original Message
>From: rei...@bellatlantic.net
>To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>Subject: Re: Debian stock kernel config -- CONFIG_NR_CPUS=32?
>Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 20:05:49 -0400
>
>>On Friday 22 October 2010 11:34:19 ow...@netptc.net wrote:
&
On Friday 22 October 2010 03:22:02 Sven Joachim wrote:
> On 2010-10-22 03:15 +0200, Andrew Reid wrote:
> > I recently deployed some new many-core servers at work, with
> > 48 cores each (4x 12 core AMD 6174s), and ran into an issue where
> > the stock Debian kernel is compiled with CONFIG_NR_CPUS
ow...@netptc.net put forth on 10/22/2010 5:18 PM:
> Ron et al
> See the following:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl's_law
> Larry
Amdahl's law doesn't apply to capacity systems, only capability systems.
Capacity systems are limited almost exclusively by memory,
IPC/coherence, and I/O bandwi
On Friday 22 October 2010 11:34:19 ow...@netptc.net wrote:
> In fact IIRC the additional overhead follows the square of the number
> of CPUs. I seem to recall this was called Amdahl's Law after Gene
> Amdahl of IBM (and later his own company)
Either that's not it, or there's more than one "Amd
>
>
>
> Original Message
>From: ron.l.john...@cox.net
>To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>Subject: Re: Debian stock kernel config -- CONFIG_NR_CPUS=32?
>Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 12:44:39 -0500
>
>>On 10/22/2010 10:34 AM, ow...@netptc.net wrote:
>>>&
On 10/22/2010 10:34 AM, ow...@netptc.net wrote:
Original Message
From: ron.l.john...@cox.net
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Debian stock kernel config -- CONFIG_NR_CPUS=32?
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 02:00:45 -0500
Correct. The amount of effort needed for cross-CPU
>
>
>
> Original Message
>From: ron.l.john...@cox.net
>To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
>Subject: Re: Debian stock kernel config -- CONFIG_NR_CPUS=32?
>Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 02:00:45 -0500
>
>>On 10/22/2010 12:53 AM, Arthur Machlas wrote:
>>> On
Ron Johnson put forth on 10/22/2010 2:00 AM:
> On 10/22/2010 12:53 AM, Arthur Machlas wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Andrew Reid
>> wrote:
>>> But I'm curious if anyone on the list knows the rationale for
>>> distributing kernels with this set to 32. Is that just a
>>> reasonable nu
On 2010-10-22 03:15 +0200, Andrew Reid wrote:
> I recently deployed some new many-core servers at work, with
> 48 cores each (4x 12 core AMD 6174s), and ran into an issue where
> the stock Debian kernel is compiled with CONFIG_NR_CPUS=32,
> meaning it will only use the first 32 cores that it see
On 10/22/2010 12:53 AM, Arthur Machlas wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Andrew Reid wrote:
But I'm curious if anyone on the list knows the rationale for
distributing kernels with this set to 32. Is that just a
reasonable number that's never been updated? Or is there some
complication
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:15 PM, Andrew Reid wrote:
> But I'm curious if anyone on the list knows the rationale for
> distributing kernels with this set to 32. Is that just a
> reasonable number that's never been updated? Or is there some
> complication that arises after 32 cores, and should I
Hi all --
I recently deployed some new many-core servers at work, with
48 cores each (4x 12 core AMD 6174s), and ran into an issue where
the stock Debian kernel is compiled with CONFIG_NR_CPUS=32,
meaning it will only use the first 32 cores that it sees.
For old Debian hands like me, thi
16 matches
Mail list logo
