On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 06:22:33 PDT Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 6:06 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <shaposh...@gmail.com> wrot > e > >> It is. But what's your proposal on code sharing? All those PC > >> registers belonging to > >> different cores have to point somewhere. Is that somewhere is not shared m > e= > >> mory > >> the code has to be put there for every single core, right? > > > > At the hardware level we do have message passing between a > > processor and the memory controller -- this is exactly the > > same as talking to a shared server and has the same issues of > > scaling etc. If you have very few clients, a single shared > > server is indeed a cost effective solution. > > I guess I'm not following. My question to OP was strictly about > code sharing. Basically were do the cores get instructions from > if not from shared memory.
Sorry, I should've done a better job of editing. I was really responding to the OP's point that sharing memory between processes is a stupid approach. My point was that "sharing memory" is just a low level programming interface (implemented by message passing in h/w) and it makes sense at some scale.
