From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 26 07:51:42 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CA9E16A417; Wed, 26 Dec 2007 07:51:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from mail.netplex.net (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34AAA13C46A; Wed, 26 Dec 2007 07:51:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from deischen@freebsd.org) Received: from sea.ntplx.net (sea.ntplx.net [204.213.176.11]) by mail.netplex.net (8.14.2/8.14.2/NETPLEX) with ESMTP id lBQ7pdfg003814; Wed, 26 Dec 2007 02:51:40 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS and Clam AntiVirus (mail.netplex.net) X-Greylist: Message whitelisted by DRAC access database, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.10]); Wed, 26 Dec 2007 02:51:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 02:51:39 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen X-X-Sender: eischen@sea.ntplx.net To: David Xu In-Reply-To: <47707EA2.8010002@freebsd.org> Message-ID: References: <20071219211025.T899@desktop> <476B1973.6070902@freebsd.org> <20071222183700.L5866@fledge.watson.org> <476F0EE5.1040404@freebsd.org> <601bffc40712241909t10e6f3k8e7940d387b6efc2@mail.gmail.com> <47707EA2.8010002@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Brian McGinty , Robert Watson , arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linux compatible setaffinity. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Daniel Eischen List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 07:51:42 -0000 On Tue, 25 Dec 2007, David Xu wrote: > Brian McGinty wrote: >> On Dec 23, 2007 5:44 PM, David Xu wrote: >>> Robert Watson wrote: >>>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2007, David Xu wrote: >>>> >>>>> I don't say no to these interfaces, but there is a need to tell user >>>>> which cpus are sharing cache, or memory distance is closest enough, >>>>> and which cpus are servicing interrupts, e.g, network interrupt and >>>>> disks etc, etc, otherwise, blindly setting cpu affinity mask only can >>>>> shoot itself in the foot. >>>> While the Mac OS X API is pretty Mach-specific, it's worth taking a look >>>> at their recently-announced affinity API: >>>> >>>> http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/Performance/RN-AffinityAPI/index.html >>>> >>>> >>>> Robert N M Watson >>>> Computer Laboratory >>>> University of Cambridge >>>> >>> >>> I like the interfaces, it is more flexible. >> >> I agree. May I as k what's being planned? It's Jeffs' call finally I think. >> >> Brian. > > I don't have plan. ;-) If I understand it correctly, it is a hint to > scheduler, it is better describing thread relationship, while Jeff's > interface is a hard cpu binding interface, it is still needed in some > circumstance. Please take a look at Solaris' API for processor set binding: http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/816-5167/6mbb2jae6?a=expand See processor_bind, processor_info, and pset_*. -- DE