Re: Interesting analysis of linux kernel threading by IBM

From: H. Peter Anvin (hpa@transmeta.com)
Date: Thu Jan 20 2000 - 19:29:39 EST

Next message: Andrew McMillan: "Re: PCI in docking station"
Previous message: wayne@moneyworld.co.uk: "Eepro 100 issues"
In reply to: Blu3Viper: "Re: Interesting analysis of linux kernel threading by IBM"
Next in thread: Ingo Molnar: "Linux scheduler, overscheduling performance, threads"
Reply: Ingo Molnar: "Linux scheduler, overscheduling performance, threads"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Followup to: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0001201436070.29486-100000@james.kalifornia.com>
By author: Blu3Viper <david@killerlabs.com>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> So it is a net gain on any machine with 8 or more running processes. Pretty
> much all of my machines fall in that range and most of them are personal
> workstations.
>

*RUNNING* processes? Most desktops don't have even one running
process most of the time.

-hpa

-- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Andrew McMillan: "Re: PCI in docking station"
Previous message: wayne@moneyworld.co.uk: "Eepro 100 issues"
In reply to: Blu3Viper: "Re: Interesting analysis of linux kernel threading by IBM"
Next in thread: Ingo Molnar: "Linux scheduler, overscheduling performance, threads"
Reply: Ingo Molnar: "Linux scheduler, overscheduling performance, threads"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 23 2000 - 21:00:23 EST