[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: GSoc2010 project suggestion: swcryptX
Somewhat OT, but...
On Feb 22, 2010, at 19:51, Greywolf wrote:
In such an implementation, have you considered having the ability to
exclusively bind the entirety of a crypto handler to one cpu out of 4
or whatever, or would that be more of a loss?
[I don't see a lot of gain from 3 cpus up to 4, but then I'm not
benchmarking, either. If I were doing accelerated crypto, I
would consider it acceptable to have a single cpu of the multi-
core system dedicated exclusively to handling crypto.]
I've had some similar thoughts. Not doing a lot of benchmarking,
but using lightly-loadd real-world workloads, I see a *clear*
advantage in 2 processors. Both desktop and server benefit. But,
I've been wondering of the advantages of four. I mean, certainly, the
"right software" makes great use of such, but few are the "right
softwares" in my experience, and they aren't the general-purpose
systems. (more now than 10 years ago, but....)
I find interesting the idea of dedicating a CPU to some tasks like
crypto, that are CPU expensive. If the kernel and/or libs were
engineered such that any vaguely multi-thread-capable application need
do nothing to have a "marked" CPU handle all the crypto, and the other
threads handle everything else, it does seem kinda cool...
And of course, the same invitation for dismissium applies...
Main Index |
Thread Index |