Changeset 3fe4acd for doc/theses/thierry_delisle_PhD/thesis
- Timestamp:
- Aug 1, 2022, 4:10:39 PM (2 years ago)
- Branches:
- ADT, ast-experimental, master, pthread-emulation
- Children:
- 80d16f8
- Parents:
- 4e21942
- File:
-
- 1 edited
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
-
doc/theses/thierry_delisle_PhD/thesis/text/front.tex
r4e21942 r3fe4acd 125 125 User-Level threading (M:N) is gaining popularity over kernel-level threading (1:1) in many programming languages. 126 126 The user threading approach is often a better mechanism to express complex concurrent applications by efficiently running 10,000+ threads on multi-core systems. 127 Indeed, over-partitioning into small work-units with user threading significantly eases load bal\-ancing, while simultaneously providing advanced synchronization and mutual exclusion mechanisms.127 Indeed, over-partitioning into small work-units with user threading significantly eases load bal\-ancing, while simultaneously providing advanced synchronization and mutual exclusion capabilities. 128 128 To manage these high levels of concurrency, the underlying runtime must efficiently schedule many user threads across a few kernel threads; 129 129 which begs of the question of how many kernel threads are needed and should the number be dynamically reevaluated. 130 130 Furthermore, scheduling must prevent kernel threads from blocking, otherwise user-thread parallelism drops. 131 When user-threading parallelism does drop, how and when should idle kernel-threads be to sleep to avoid wasted CPU resources.131 When user-threading parallelism does drop, how and when should idle kernel-threads be put to sleep to avoid wasted CPU resources. 132 132 Finally, the scheduling system must provide fairness to prevent a user thread from monopolizing a kernel thread; 133 133 otherwise other user threads can experience short/long term starvation or kernel threads can deadlock waiting for events to occur on busy kernel threads.
Note: See TracChangeset
for help on using the changeset viewer.