[Beowulf] 1.2 us IB latency?
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Patrick Geoffray patrick at myri.comThu Apr 19 15:47:01 PDT 2007
- Previous message: [Beowulf] 1.2 us IB latency?
- Next message: [Beowulf] 1.2 us IB latency?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
greg.lindahl at qlogic.com wrote: >> Back then we were struggling with PIO transfers and how they were >> treated in the CPU/North bridge (write combining and all that). I >> believe this might still be an issue, correct ? WC is well implemented on Opteron, it will aggregate consecutive PIO writes at 16, 32 and 64 Bytes smoothly. On Intel processors, this is more painful: WC is only 64 Bytes. If you flush the WC buffer with less than 64 bytes in it, you will see multiple 8-byte PIO writes, and not always in order. > cases we can manipulate the mtrrs after boot to fix this. Getting > formal support for PAT in the Linux kernel is the long-term fix for > this. It's interesting to note that most current OSes have native PAT support, except Linux. Even Windows does it well :-) Patrick
- Previous message: [Beowulf] 1.2 us IB latency?
- Next message: [Beowulf] 1.2 us IB latency?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
