Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 15:58:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 15:58:47 -0400 Received: from [195.137.34.203] ([195.137.34.203]:28848 "HELO sam.home.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 15:58:46 -0400 Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 21:14:17 +0100 From: Sam Mason To: Ingo Molnar Cc: shreenivasa H V , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Gang Scheduling in linux Message-ID: <20020717201417.GA9546@sam.home.net> References:

Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 911 Lines: 19 On Thu, Jul 18, 2002 at 07:40:19PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: >Can you point out specific (real-life) workloads where this >would be advantegous? It's mainly used for programs that needs lots of processing power chucked at a specific problem, the problem is first broken down into several small pieces and each part is sent off to a different processor. When each piece has been processed, they are all recombined and the rest of the calculation is continued. The problem with this is that if any one of the pieces is delayed, all the processors will be idle waiting for the interrupted piece to be processed, before they can process the next set of pieces. Sam - 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/