Subject: re: Moving scheduler semantics from cpu_switch() to kern_synch.c
To: Jason Thorpe <thorpej@shagadelic.org>
From: matthew green <mrg@eterna.com.au>
List: tech-kern
Date: 09/22/2006 03:05:34 
   
   > 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.


so every process is bound to a cpu?  i guess i don't understand how
this works to avoid cpus idling while lwps are waiting for "their"
cpu to become free...  who runs a new process first?  right now it
is who ever tries to first.


.mrg.