Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!rutgers!att!cbnewsh!dwc
From: dwc@cbnewsh.ATT.COM (Malaclypse the Elder)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Cache flush penalty at context switch.
Message-ID: <7846@cbnewsh.ATT.COM>
Date: 1 Feb 90 00:56:20 GMT
References: <1990Jan22.175714.20645@Solbourne.COM> <1062@yarra.oz.au>
Organization: The Legion of Dynamic Discord
Lines: 13

In article <1062@yarra.oz.au>, chris@yarra.oz.au (Chris Jankowski) writes:
> By the way affinity scheduler will help you only if:
> 	- there is enough processors to manage.
>         - there is typically more processes running than processors.
> 	- caches use direct mapping based on physical addresses.

i don't understand the need for direct mapping.  i always thought that
n-way set associative generally resulted in a higher hit rate (cycle
issues aside).  and can you get away with virtual addresses if you add
a process id or context id flag as part of the key?

danny chen
att!hocus!dwc