Bosko Milekic wrote: > On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 11:52:53AM -0800, Matthew Dillon wrote: > > Another solution would be to have a global mask of 'idle' cpus and send > > an IPI to them when a new KSE is scheduled on a non-idle cpu that would > > simply serve to wakeup the HLT. IPIs are nasty, but there are large > > (power consumption) advantages to standardizing on the HLT methodology. > > Or, as I explained in my previous post, only HLT the [virtual] CPU if > the other [virtual] CPU that is sharing the same execution & cache > units is not HLT'd itself. If the other one is HLT'd, then not do the > HLT.
Actually, why is that? Why would you not want to HLT all the units that are not being used? -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
