On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 21:20 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 12:12:18PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Mike Galbraith <efa...@gmx.de> wrote: > > > > > > Aside from the cache pollution I recall having been mentioned, on my > > > E5620, cross core is a tbench win over affine, cross thread is not. > > > > Oh, I agree with trying to avoid HT threads, the resource contention > > easily gets too bad. > > > > It's more a question of "if we have real cores with separate L1's but > > shared L2's, go with those first, before we start distributing it out > > to separate L2's". > > Yes, this is exactly what I meant before. We basically want to avoid > unnecessary, high-volume probe traffic over the L3 or memory controller, > if possible. > > So, trying harder to select an L2 sibling would be more beneficial, > IMHO, instead of scanning the whole node.
If those L2 siblings are cores, oh yeah. Do any modern packages have multi-core shared L2? -Mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
