Subject: Re: Moving scheduler semantics from cpu_switch() to kern_synch.c
To: matthew green <email@example.com>
From: Jason Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/21/2006 09:55:11
On Sep 21, 2006, at 9:50 AM, matthew green wrote:
> it just seems suboptimal to have to set a flag in every cpu_info when
> there is a (random) process to run.
You would not set it in every cpu_info... the idea is that processes
would be "bound" to CPUs to eliminate the cache thrash that we
currently have because processes can migrate between CPUs randomly.
We're talking about per-CPU run queues, here.
> on a related issue, i kind of like the idea of real idle threads as
> opposed to the method used for current SMP sysetms (where this is all
> handled in MD code.)
Yes, me too. There are some nice benefits of having them.