6 messages in org.freebsd.freebsd-smpAssignmet of CPUs| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Erich Dollansky | Jun 1, 2005 6:58 pm | |
| Dave Stephens | Jun 2, 2005 6:16 am | |
| David Landgren | Jun 2, 2005 2:09 pm | |
| David King | Jun 2, 2005 5:35 pm | |
| David Landgren | Jun 3, 2005 12:35 am | |
| Erich Dollansky | Jun 3, 2005 1:08 am |
| Subject: | Assignmet of CPUs | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | David Landgren (dav...@landgren.net) | |
| Date: | Jun 2, 2005 2:09:35 pm | |
| List: | org.freebsd.freebsd-smp | |
Dave Stephens wrote:
The main problem I see with using temperature is that the ability to detect CPU temp. is a feature limited to "more modern" machines. It has become very common even in desktops now a days, but it wouldn't be available in legacy hardware or custom hardware.
Just a thought.
Well, round-robin startup would at least be better than always using one process to start all processes. That would go some of the way towards improving asymmetric heating. (Says me, whose knowledge of kernel scheduling could be written on the face of a chip and still leave room for footnotes...)
David
On 6/1/05, Erich Dollansky <ocea...@pacific.net.sg> wrote:
[...]
The last, but hardly used parameter, is the CPU temperature. I noticed that FreeBSD tends to use always the same CPU to start a task. This makes one CPU real hot while the other stays cool. Taking the CPU temperature into account for starting at least new threads would also have an advantage of systems with an less then ideal cooling system.
Spreading tasks all over the system with the coolest CPU being the one to be started next will make systems a bit cooler.