The main problem I see with using temperature is that the ability to detect CPU temp. is a feature limited to "more modern" machines. It has become very common even in desktops now a days, but it wouldn't be available in legacy hardware or custom hardware.
Just a thought. On 6/1/05, Erich Dollansky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > it is a general problem of systems with more than one CPU to assign the > proper CPU to a task. > > The most obvious problem is the cache. If a task is migrating all the > time, the cache has to be reloaded again and again. > > The next problem is the location of the data in RAM on NUMA machines. It > is better to leave a thread on a CPU if the RAM connected to it also has > the data stored. This could block a task from running if to many running > tasks have their data stored on the same CPU. > > The last, but hardly used parameter, is the CPU temperature. I noticed > that FreeBSD tends to use always the same CPU to start a task. This > makes one CPU real hot while the other stays cool. Taking the CPU > temperature into account for starting at least new threads would also > have an advantage of systems with an less then ideal cooling system. > > Spreading tasks all over the system with the coolest CPU being the one > to be started next will make systems a bit cooler. > > Erich > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-smp > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-smp To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
