Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2007 09:44:05 +0800 From: David Xu <davidxu@FreeBSD.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Linux compatible setaffinity. Message-ID: <476F0EE5.1040404@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20071222183700.L5866@fledge.watson.org> References: <20071219211025.T899@desktop> <476B1973.6070902@freebsd.org> <20071222183700.L5866@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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. Thanks David Xu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?476F0EE5.1040404>