Subject: re: Moving scheduler semantics from cpu_switch() to kern_synch.c
To: Jason Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: matthew green <email@example.com>
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.