[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110328231818.2297408f@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 23:18:18 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <luke.leighton@...il.com>
Cc: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Will Newton <will.newton@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: advice sought: practicality of SMP cache coherency implemented
in assembler (and a hardware detect line)
> ok - well, having thought about this a little bit (in a non-detailed
> high-level way) i was sort-of hoping, as alan hinted at, to still do
> SMP, even if it's slow, for userspace. the primary thing to prevent
> from happening is to have kernelspace data structures from
> conflicting.
>
> i found kerrigan, btw, spoke to the people on it: louis agreed that
> the whole idea was mad as hell and was therefore actually very
> interesting to attempt :)
>
> as a first approximation i'm absolutely happy for existing pthreads
> applications to be forced to run on the same core.
The underlying problem across a cluster of nodes can be handled
transparently. MOSIX solved that problem a very long time ago using DSM
(distributed shared memory). It's not pretty, it requires a lot of tuning
to make it fly but they did it over comparatively slow interconnects.
Alan
--
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