Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 05:45:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 05:45:42 -0500 Received: from smtp1.vol.cz ([195.250.128.73]:4883 "EHLO smtp1.vol.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 05:45:33 -0500 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 20:21:13 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Alan Cox Cc: kernel list Subject: Re: [RFC] Scheduler queue implementation ... Message-ID: <20011221202113.D415@elf.ucw.cz> In-Reply-To: <20011220203630.A204@elf.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > I'd guess that if cpu-bound software wants to use clone(CLONE_VM) to > > gain some performance, it should better work "mostly" in different > > memory areas on different cpus... But I could be wrong. > > Lots of people use shared mm objects and threads for things like UI > rather But ... UI performance should not matter much. And that is *abuse* of threads. > than just for cpu hogging. If they have multiple cpu hogs doing that then > they want punishing (or better yet sending a copy of a document on > caches) If I have a raytracer, and want to explore 8 cpus, how do I do that? Separate scene into 8 pieces, make sure no r/w data are shared, and clone(CLONE_VM). Are there other ways? [I do not know if people are really doing it like that. *I* would do it that way. Is it bad?] Pavel -- "I do not steal MS software. It is not worth it." -- Pavel Kankovsky - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/