Hyperthreading
Hyperthreading
Posted May 9, 2013 13:14 UTC (Thu) by sheepdestroyer (guest, #54968)In reply to: Hyperthreading by bgmarete
Parent article: (Nearly) full tickless operation in 3.10
Posted May 9, 2013 15:59 UTC (Thu)
by drago01 (subscriber, #50715)
[Link] (5 responses)
Posted May 10, 2013 8:43 UTC (Fri)
by akeane (guest, #85436)
[Link] (4 responses)
Really, "cooperative" multi-tasking?
Really?
Really...
Posted May 10, 2013 18:59 UTC (Fri)
by PaulMcKenney (✭ supporter ✭, #9624)
[Link]
If there is only one CPU-bound task runnable on a given CPU, there is no point in any scheduling decisions.
If there are multiple tasks runnable on a given CPU, and if the currently running task is CPU-bound, then there is no point in any scheduling decisions until the next timeslice.
Of course, things might change in the meantime, but in that case, this CPU will receive an interrupt and can therefore adjust as appropriate at that point in time.
Posted May 13, 2013 21:46 UTC (Mon)
by chloe_zen (guest, #8258)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted May 20, 2013 23:13 UTC (Mon)
by marcH (subscriber, #57642)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted May 21, 2013 7:49 UTC (Tue)
by cladisch (✭ supporter ✭, #50193)
[Link]
> ticks to look some day as outdated as polling?
Polling is regularly checking the status, just because something that needs handling might have happened.
Ticks are polling.
Hyperthreading
Hyperthreading
Hyperthreading
Hyperthreading
Hyperthreading
ticks vs. polling