From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262104AbTLHXxS (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2003 18:53:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262108AbTLHXxS (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2003 18:53:18 -0500 Received: from mail-06.iinet.net.au ([203.59.3.38]:43684 "HELO mail.iinet.net.au") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S262104AbTLHXxQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2003 18:53:16 -0500 Message-ID: <3FD50456.3050003@cyberone.com.au> Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 10:08:06 +1100 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030827 Debian/1.4-3 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Anton Blanchard CC: Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Rusty Russell , Zwane Mwaikambo , linux-kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] make cpu_sibling_map a cpumask_t References: <3FD3FD52.7020001@cyberone.com.au> <20031208155904.GF19412@krispykreme> In-Reply-To: <20031208155904.GF19412@krispykreme> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Anton Blanchard wrote: > > >>I'm not aware of any reason why the kernel should not become generally >>SMT aware. It is sufficiently different to SMP that it is worth >>specialising it, although I am only aware of P4 and POWER5 implementations. >> > >I agree, SMT is likely to become more popular in the coming years. > > >>I have an alternative to Ingo's HT scheduler which basically does >>the same thing. It is showing a 20% elapsed time improvement with a >>make -j3 on a 2xP4 Xeon (4 logical CPUs). >> >>Before Ingo's is merged, I would like to discuss the pros and cons of >>both approaches with those interested. If Ingo's is accepted I should >>still be able to port my other SMP/NUMA improvements on top of it. >> > >Sounds good, have you got anything to test? I can throw it on a POWER5. > It would be great to get some testing on another architecture. I don't have an architecture independant way to build SMT scheduling descriptions, although with the cpu_sibling_map change, you can copy and paste the code for the P4 if you are able to build a cpu_sibling_map. I'll just have to add a some bits so SMT and NUMA work together which I will be unable to test. I'll get back to you with some code.