Actually, a friend of mine is currently in the Technion doing a Masters'
degree, with the thesis subject being what is the best L1 etc. cache
remove policy that is best suited for SMT. As far as I know, this is, as
of yet, and unanswered question.
Shachar
Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
On
On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 06:52:02PM +0200, Eran Tromer wrote:
> Hmmm. Then if the scheduler is unaware of SMT, then even on a
> single-processor box SMT may degrade performance due to memory cache
> issues -- when two unrelated threads are executed in parallel, the
> effective size of the L1 and L2
On Sun, 10 Nov 2002 14:44:39 +0200
"Nadav Har'El" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. Improving scalability: letting you run 10,000 threads concurrently, and
> starting and deleting 100,000 threads per second, and things like that,
> which I wonder if anyone really needs.
One of the most c
Hmmm. Then if the scheduler is unaware of SMT, then even on a
single-processor box SMT may degrade performance due to memory cache
issues -- when two unrelated threads are executed in parallel, the
effective size of the L1 and L2 caches is halved. With today's processor
vs. DRAM speed difference, t
On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 06:26:28PM +0200, Hetz Ben Hamo wrote:
> > Now, AFAIK Linux does have some scheduler code to handle this right, I
> > just can't seem to remember if it's in 2.4.x or only in 2.5.x
>
> I think that today's it's inside RedHat's kernel version, not in the standard
> Linus-rel
> Now, AFAIK Linux does have some scheduler code to handle this right, I
> just can't seem to remember if it's in 2.4.x or only in 2.5.x
I think that today's it's inside RedHat's kernel version, not in the standard
Linus-releases version (I'm talking about kernel 2.4.x - not about 2.5.x)
I'll as
Dvir Volk wrote:
AFAIK, the more you run multithreaded apps, the more performance gain
you get, isn't it?
On which linux apps should one see more imporvement? I guess servers
like apache and mysql can gain a lot - relatively - from hyperthreading,
for example.
Something non obious to note about
On Sun, Nov 10, 2002, Hetz Ben-Hamo wrote about "RE: I have 2 spare CPU's (maybe not)":
> As much as I know, Linux doesn't really excells in multi-threading (anyone -
> please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not very familiar on that issue)..
>
> You CAN how
On Sun, 10 Nov 2002 14:07:19 +0200, Dvir Volk wrote
> AFAIK, the more you run multithreaded apps, the more performance gain
> you get, isn't it?
> On which linux apps should one see more imporvement? I guess servers
> like apache and mysql can gain a lot - relatively - from
> hyperthreading, for e
tz Ben-Hamo [mailto:hetz@;witch.dyndns.org]
> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 1:04 PM
> To: Boris Gorelik; Linux-IL mailing list
> Subject: Re: I have 2 spare CPU's (maybe not)
>
>
> Congratulations,
>
> You just bought Intel Hyperthreading processors. Don't expec
Congratulations,
You just bought Intel Hyperthreading processors. Don't expect any earth breaking
performance from this (maximum 20% gain and even this is very rare)..
Thanks,
Hetz
On Sun, 10 Nov 2002 10:48:50 +0200, Boris Gorelik wrote
> this is a VERY strange problem. My boss have bought a n
On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 10:48:50AM +0200, Boris Gorelik wrote:
> I have even opened the box to verify the number of the CPU's.
>
> Does anyone know anything about this behaviour? How should I treat the load
> fugures I get from top?
Which kernel are you running? newer kernels (and newer CPUs) s
http://arstechnica.com/paedia/h/hyperthreading/hyperthreading-1.html
> -Original Message-
> From: Boris Gorelik [mailto:bgbg@;pob.huji.ac.il]
> Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2002 10:49 AM
> To: Linux-IL mailing list
> Subject: I have 2 spare CPU's (maybe not)
>
>
> this
this is a VERY strange problem. My boss have bought a new computer with two
Xeon CPUs (he loves dual machines, and we don't comlain about it ;) ).
Last wednesday I've noticed that the top command showed 4 CPU's:
[bgbg]$ top -bn1i | head
10:32am up 4 days, 1:03, 7 users, load average: 1.59, 1
14 matches
Mail list logo
