From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265984AbUBCK6B (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2004 05:58:01 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265983AbUBCK5u (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2004 05:57:50 -0500 Received: from mx1.elte.hu ([157.181.1.137]:22710 "EHLO mx1.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265974AbUBCK5s (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Feb 2004 05:57:48 -0500 Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 11:58:01 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Con Kolivas Cc: linux kernel mailing list , Jos Hulzink Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.1 Hyperthread smart "nice" 2 Message-ID: <20040203105758.GA7783@elte.hu> References: <200401291917.42087.kernel@kolivas.org> <200402022027.10151.kernel@kolivas.org> <20040202103122.GA29402@elte.hu> <200402032152.46481.kernel@kolivas.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200402032152.46481.kernel@kolivas.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-ELTE-SpamVersion: SpamAssassin 2.60 X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-4.9, required 5.9, BAYES_00 -4.90 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamScore: -4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Con Kolivas wrote: > At least it appears Intel are well aware of the priority problem, but > full priority support across logical cores is not likely. However I > guess these new instructions are probably enough to work with if > someone can do the coding. these instructions can be used in the idle=poll code instead of rep-nop. This way idle-wakeup can be done via the memory bus in essence, and the idle threads wont waste CPU time. (right now idle=poll wastes lots of cycles on HT boxes and is thus unusable.) for lowprio tasks they are of little use, unless you modify gcc to sprinkle mwait yields all around the 'lowprio code' - not very practical i think. Ingo