On Fri, 9 Jun 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> yes, there is - the lack of ability to bind a userspace process to a CPU
> is the main reason why I implemented it differently from the other
> "classical" implementations.
This would be a nice feature to have in a few other contexts as well; for
a simple example, when I'm running SETI@home on my machine, I really want
one instance on each CPU. There's no point in having two instances sharing
a single CPU, while another task uses the first; if I could lock one
instance to each CPU, there would be some performance increase.
Incidentally, the WWW site you posted a link to looks good, but two small
points: you don't mention which kernel version is needed, and the link
given is a bit vague (ftp.kernel.org is a big place...)
James.
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 15 2000 - 21:00:18 EST