how to assign a specific thread to specific processor?

It's possible to do on win32/64 and some *nixes. Very usefull on
todays multicore processors for optimizations. Is it possible on
linux? Without it it really sucks.. :(

On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:34:55 -0800, Xvaall wrote:

> It's possible to do on win32/64 and some *nixes. Very usefull on
> todays multicore processors for optimizations. Is it possible on
> linux? Without it it really sucks.. :(

I'd assume that Linux is really poor on serial multi-processing, probably
Windows is much better. Especially because hand-optimising is known to
beat the computer every time.

Shame no-one told IBM or NASA or Cray all that though, otherwise they would
have known not to use Linux for their newest generation of supercomputers.

On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 21:09:00 +0100, Mark South wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:34:55 -0800, Xvaall wrote:
>
>> It's possible to do on win32/64 and some *nixes. Very usefull on
>> todays multicore processors for optimizations. Is it possible on
>> linux? Without it it really sucks.. :(
>
> I'd assume that Linux is really poor on serial multi-processing, probably
> Windows is much better. Especially because hand-optimising is known to
> beat the computer every time.
>
> Shame no-one told IBM or NASA or Cray all that though, otherwise they would
> have known not to use Linux for their newest generation of supercomputers.

I just shot coffee out my nose... thanks for the laugh.

--
I told you this was going to happen.

On Nov 12, 3:09 pm, Mark South <mark.so...@null.invalid> wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 11:34:55 -0800, Xvaall wrote:
> > It's possible to do on win32/64 and some *nixes. Very usefull on
> > todays multicore processors for optimizations. Is it possible on
> > linux? Without it it really sucks.. :(
>
> I'd assume that Linux is really poor on serial multi-processing, probably
> Windows is much better. Especially because hand-optimising is known to
> beat the computer every time.
>
> Shame no-one told IBM or NASA or Cray all that though, otherwise they would
> have known not to use Linux for their newest generation of supercomputers.


In other words you don't know the answer..
or the answer is "you don't need this, trust me"..
correct? ;)

Xvaall wrote:
> It's possible to do on win32/64 and some *nixes. Very usefull on
> todays multicore processors for optimizations. Is it possible on
> linux? Without it it really sucks.. :(
>

man schedutils

microsoft suxx as it can't manage simple things like man pages.

--

//Aho

On Nov 12, 3:46 pm, "J.O. Aho" <u...@example.net> wrote:
> Xvaall wrote:
> > It's possible to do on win32/64 and some *nixes. Very usefull on
> > todays multicore processors for optimizations. Is it possible on
> > linux? Without it it really sucks.. :(
>
> man schedutils
>
> microsoft suxx as it can't manage simple things like man pages.

Thanks, good starting point

sched_setaffinity() is probably it...

J.O. Aho wrote:
> Xvaall wrote:
>> It's possible to do on win32/64 and some *nixes. Very usefull on
>> todays multicore processors for optimizations. Is it possible on
>> linux? Without it it really sucks.. :(
>>
>
> man schedutils
>
> microsoft suxx as it can't manage simple things like man pages.
>
Or Linux who cannot decide a common repository!

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:22:07 -0800, Anthony wrote:

> J.O. Aho wrote:
>> Xvaall wrote:
>>> It's possible to do on win32/64 and some *nixes. Very usefull on
>>> todays multicore processors for optimizations. Is it possible on
>>> linux? Without it it really sucks.. :(
>>>
>>
>> man schedutils
>>
>> microsoft suxx as it can't manage simple things like man pages.
>>
> Or Linux who cannot decide a common repository!

Yes... having choice is a horrible, horrible thing.

--
I told you this was going to happen.

On Nov 14, 2:22 pm, Anthony <a...@verizon.net> wrote:

> >> timizations. Is it possible on
> >> linux? Without it it really sucks.. :(
>
> > man schedutils
>
> > microsoft suxx as it can't manage simple things like man pages.
>
> Or Linux who cannot decide a common repository!

I'm sick of these holly wars. It's nice to have something to chose
from. I don't want to live in MS only world, nether do I like GNU
world. Thanks to competion we have fast development on both sides, and
reasonable prices.


PS: Linux does have common repository like windows. They just don't
use it :))

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:22:07 -0800, Anthony wrote:

>> microsoft suxx as it can't manage simple things like man pages.
>>
> Or Linux who cannot decide a common repository!

Linux has a common repository. It's called the Internet.

Ivan Marsh wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:22:07 -0800, Anthony wrote:
>
>> J.O. Aho wrote:
>>> Xvaall wrote:
>>>> It's possible to do on win32/64 and some *nixes. Very usefull on
>>>> todays multicore processors for optimizations. Is it possible on
>>>> linux? Without it it really sucks.. :(
>>>>
>>> man schedutils
>>>
>>> microsoft suxx as it can't manage simple things like man pages.
>>>
>> Or Linux who cannot decide a common repository!
>
> Yes... having choice is a horrible, horrible thing.
>
Yes, like the choice of some 1000 different versions of Linux.

Until some common denominator in software Linux client will be oppressed

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 07:16:11 -0800, Anthony wrote:

> Ivan Marsh wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:22:07 -0800, Anthony wrote:
>>
>>> J.O. Aho wrote:
>>>> Xvaall wrote:
>>>>> It's possible to do on win32/64 and some *nixes. Very usefull on
>>>>> todays multicore processors for optimizations. Is it possible on
>>>>> linux? Without it it really sucks.. :(
>>>>>
>>>> man schedutils
>>>>
>>>> microsoft suxx as it can't manage simple things like man pages.
>>>>
>>> Or Linux who cannot decide a common repository!
>>
>> Yes... having choice is a horrible, horrible thing.
>>
> Yes, like the choice of some 1000 different versions of Linux.

There is only one Linux. There are +/-1000 different distributions.

You're complaining that when you go to buy a car you get to choose what
color it is.

> Until some common denominator in software Linux client will be oppressed

You not write English good.

Some common denominator? Like internationally recognized standards?, A
single kernel that can be tailored for your architecture and needs?

Q: What version of Windows do you run on <insert non-intel based processor
here>?

A: You don't.

--
I told you this was going to happen.

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 07:16:11 -0800, Anthony wrote:

> Ivan Marsh wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:22:07 -0800, Anthony wrote:
>>
>>> J.O. Aho wrote:
>>>> Xvaall wrote:
>>>>> It's possible to do on win32/64 and some *nixes. Very usefull on
>>>>> todays multicore processors for optimizations. Is it possible on
>>>>> linux? Without it it really sucks.. :(
>>>>>
>>>> man schedutils
>>>>
>>>> microsoft suxx as it can't manage simple things like man pages.
>>>>
>>> Or Linux who cannot decide a common repository!
>>
>> Yes... having choice is a horrible, horrible thing.
>>
> Yes, like the choice of some 1000 different versions of Linux.
>
> Until some common denominator in software Linux client will be oppressed

Does the rest of your life make as little sense as that last line of yours?