On Mon, 7 Feb 2005, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Look at the early posts. I plan to put that up on the web. I have some > > stats attached to the end of this message from an earlier post. > > But that's a patch-specific microbenchmark, isn't it? Has this work been > benchmarked against real-world stuff?
No its a page fault benchmark. Dave Miller has done some kernel compiles and I have some benchmarks here that I never posted because they do not show any material change as far as I can see. I will be posting that soon when this is complete (also need to do the same for the atomic page fault ops and the prefaulting patch). > > > Should we be managing the kernel threads with the kthread() API? > > > > What would you like to manage? > > Startup, perhaps binding the threads to their cpus too. That is all already controllable in the same way as the swapper. Each memory node is bound to a set of cpus. This may be controlled by the NUMA node configuration. F.e. for nodes without cpus. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/