[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061112142813.GA4371@ucw.cz>
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 14:28:13 +0000
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Mikulas Patocka <mikulas@...ax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
Cc: Albert Cahalan <acahalan@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2048 CPUs [was: Re: New filesystem for Linux]
Hi!
> >>You can't tell that CPUs behave exactly
> >>probabilistically --- it may
> >>happen that one gets out of the wait loop always too
> >>late.
> >
> >Well, I don't need them to be _exactly_
> >probabilistical.
> >
> >Anyway, if you have 2048 CPUs... you can perhaps get
> >some non-broken
> >ones.
>
> No intel document guarantees you that if more CPUs
> simultaneously execute locked cmpxchg in a loop that a
If we are talking 2048 cpus, we are talking ia64.
> CPU will see compare success in a finite time. In fact,
> CPUs can't guarantee this at all, because they don't
> know that they're executing a spinlock --- for them its
> just an instruction stream like anything else.
...even i386 has monitor/mwait these days.
Pavel
--
Thanks for all the (sleeping) penguins.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists