Paul Davis wrote: > On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 2:11 PM, Jeremy Henty <onepoint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > Will Godfrey wrote: > > > > > If I've understood that correctly you can also ensure that they are > > > also on the same socket, which apparently improves memory access. > > > > I think this is what is meant by NUMA (Non-Uniform Memory access). > > AFAIK, NUMA is dead for everything except a few research systems. > > Parallel/multi-processor systems these days are all "symmetric" (all > processors have symmetrical access to all memory). > > NUMA is really, really, really hard to get right. Why? Cache > invalidation. Several companies, organizations, etc. have > tried. Last time I looked (and it has been a while, but I was quite > involved with this stuff in the mid 1990s), everybody failed. Until I read the Wikipedia NUMA page just now I didn't realise that NUMA involved multiple processors having their own caches of the same data. Thanks for bringing me up to speed. Regards, Jeremy Henty _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
