|
|
Anyone know why the affinity (at least with my workload) over assigns the
tasks to core 1 to the point where it will make applications hang while core
0 has a small workload. Every day I have to go thru about 8 tasks and reset
the affinity to core 0 and it works great the rest of the day. Any way to
set it permanently as this is a pain each morning.
|
|
I know very little about this, but when I was setting up my M2N32 with a
FX-62 I tested the FSX (Flight Simulator) pre-release as this provides among
the heaviest workloads that is generally available, short of a professional
grade burn-in utility. I wondered why everything seemed to be running off
only one core and tried to read up about it. I also found that it was
extremely difficult to schedule a workload that was any kind of stress to
the CPU - no matter what I did, it was just idling. (My demands are modest)
In the end I fired up to defrag (it.s RAID) and started FSX at the same
time, and running from the same partition, while watching what was going on.
This, the CPU handled with extreme ease, total utilization of about 60 -
70%. It would seem that when processing approached 50% on the prefered core
the system started putting more and more work on the other - I also read
that the system (Windows Scheduler, I suppose) prefers executing on one core
for caching reasons, i.e. you wouldn't want to transfer a job to the other
core if it had already been scheduled to the cache of the first.
The upshot of all this is that it seems to balance quite well here, with me.
Provided there is something to do. Small jobs, all run on one core. Why you
are having that sort of trouble, I cannot guess, unless you have been
'playing' with affinity before the trouble surfaced. One possible thing to
look for is if you have one app that is stubborn and specifically want to
run on one core when the system would rather move it over - such behavior
would be bad coding, but when did we ever see the end of that?
Perhaps you should go through the BIOS and check your settings for C&Q?
If you have been testing the over/underclock facilities, I would suggest
resetting the BIOS to the default - actually this may be a good point to
start with in any case, the more advanced Asus BIOS's tend to be a bit
complex, with bits influencing other bits in a way that doesn't seem logical
at first glance.
Tony. . .
"John Barnes" <jbarnes[ at ]email.net> wrote in message
news:OhKL%23w6hHHA.3960[ at ]TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
[Quoted Text] > Anyone know why the affinity (at least with my workload) over assigns the
> tasks to core 1 to the point where it will make applications hang while
core
> 0 has a small workload. Every day I have to go thru about 8 tasks and
reset
> the affinity to core 0 and it works great the rest of the day. Any way to
> set it permanently as this is a pain each morning.
>
|
|
Furthermore, I happened onto this page - sounds like what you were asking,
don't know if it'll help at all.
http://www.techenclave.com/forums/cpu-affinity-made-easy-67317.html
Tony. . .
"Tony Sperling" <tony.sperling[ at ]dbREMOVEmail.dk> wrote in message
news:uz4W6z9hHHA.4552[ at ]TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
[Quoted Text] > I know very little about this, but when I was setting up my M2N32 with a
> FX-62 I tested the FSX (Flight Simulator) pre-release as this provides
among
> the heaviest workloads that is generally available, short of a
professional
> grade burn-in utility. I wondered why everything seemed to be running off
> only one core and tried to read up about it. I also found that it was
> extremely difficult to schedule a workload that was any kind of stress to
> the CPU - no matter what I did, it was just idling. (My demands are
modest)
>
> In the end I fired up to defrag (it.s RAID) and started FSX at the same
> time, and running from the same partition, while watching what was going
on.
> This, the CPU handled with extreme ease, total utilization of about 60 -
> 70%. It would seem that when processing approached 50% on the prefered
core
> the system started putting more and more work on the other - I also read
> that the system (Windows Scheduler, I suppose) prefers executing on one
core
> for caching reasons, i.e. you wouldn't want to transfer a job to the other
> core if it had already been scheduled to the cache of the first.
>
> The upshot of all this is that it seems to balance quite well here, with
me.
> Provided there is something to do. Small jobs, all run on one core. Why
you
> are having that sort of trouble, I cannot guess, unless you have been
> 'playing' with affinity before the trouble surfaced. One possible thing to
> look for is if you have one app that is stubborn and specifically want to
> run on one core when the system would rather move it over - such behavior
> would be bad coding, but when did we ever see the end of that?
>
> Perhaps you should go through the BIOS and check your settings for C&Q?
>
> If you have been testing the over/underclock facilities, I would suggest
> resetting the BIOS to the default - actually this may be a good point to
> start with in any case, the more advanced Asus BIOS's tend to be a bit
> complex, with bits influencing other bits in a way that doesn't seem
logical
> at first glance.
>
>
> Tony. . .
>
>
> "John Barnes" <jbarnes[ at ]email.net> wrote in message
> news:OhKL%23w6hHHA.3960[ at ]TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> > Anyone know why the affinity (at least with my workload) over assigns
the
> > tasks to core 1 to the point where it will make applications hang while
> core
> > 0 has a small workload. Every day I have to go thru about 8 tasks and
> reset
> > the affinity to core 0 and it works great the rest of the day. Any way
to
> > set it permanently as this is a pain each morning.
> >
>
>
|
|
It appears that not only processes can rely on processing, devices do it
too, this one mentions delayed IRQ's - although not primarily with your CPU.
http://www.vp6-board.com/affinity.htm
Tony. . .
|
|
|