Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Linux only 8 cores

Linux only 8 cores

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
comlinuxquestionannouncement
28 Posts 10 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • J jschell

    From the CP newsletter. Claims rather broadly that Linux only uses 8 cores. The Linux kernel has been accidentally hardcoded to a maximum of 8 cores for the past 15 years and nobody noticed – The HFT Guy[^] Obviously a rather startling claim. Googling suggests that quite a few people have taken exception to that claim.

    D Offline
    D Offline
    Daniel Pfeffer
    wrote on last edited by
    #3

    I read the original article. The issue is not that only 8 cores are used, but that the time slice does not scale properly with the number of cores. The larger the number of cores, the larger the inherent multitasking, so less switching is performed on each core to simulate multitasking. The Linux kernel is supposed to use a certain core number-dependent algorithm to calculate the time slice size, but the number of cores used in the calculation is maxed out at 8. IMO, this is deliberate. When you have more than 8 cores, increasing the time slice size gives no real benefit.

    Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • J jschell

      From the CP newsletter. Claims rather broadly that Linux only uses 8 cores. The Linux kernel has been accidentally hardcoded to a maximum of 8 cores for the past 15 years and nobody noticed – The HFT Guy[^] Obviously a rather startling claim. Googling suggests that quite a few people have taken exception to that claim.

      Mike HankeyM Offline
      Mike HankeyM Offline
      Mike Hankey
      wrote on last edited by
      #4

      Why would anyone need more than 8 codes? :)

      As the aircraft designer said, "Simplicate and add lightness". PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.3.0 JaxCoder.com Latest Article: SimpleWizardUpdate

      P J 2 Replies Last reply
      0
      • Mike HankeyM Mike Hankey

        Why would anyone need more than 8 codes? :)

        As the aircraft designer said, "Simplicate and add lightness". PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.3.0 JaxCoder.com Latest Article: SimpleWizardUpdate

        P Offline
        P Offline
        PIEBALDconsult
        wrote on last edited by
        #5

        Eight cores oughta be enough for anybody.

        Mike HankeyM K D 3 Replies Last reply
        0
        • P PIEBALDconsult

          Eight cores oughta be enough for anybody.

          Mike HankeyM Offline
          Mike HankeyM Offline
          Mike Hankey
          wrote on last edited by
          #6

          Anything more is just pretentious!

          As the aircraft designer said, "Simplicate and add lightness". PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.3.0 JaxCoder.com Latest Article: SimpleWizardUpdate

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • P PIEBALDconsult

            Eight cores oughta be enough for anybody.

            K Offline
            K Offline
            k5054
            wrote on last edited by
            #7

            Ah! But how many threads? I seem to recall a CPU (maybe MIPS?) that supported 3 threads per core, and there's tales of IBM Power supporting 4 or 8 TPC, and I think Sun SPARC had chips that supported 8 TPC. Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those! Oops, sorry, wrong forum :)

            "A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants" Chuckles the clown

            P Greg UtasG 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • K k5054

              Ah! But how many threads? I seem to recall a CPU (maybe MIPS?) that supported 3 threads per core, and there's tales of IBM Power supporting 4 or 8 TPC, and I think Sun SPARC had chips that supported 8 TPC. Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those! Oops, sorry, wrong forum :)

              "A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants" Chuckles the clown

              P Offline
              P Offline
              PIEBALDconsult
              wrote on last edited by
              #8

              (PIEBALD looks up Itanium specs...)

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • K k5054

                Ah! But how many threads? I seem to recall a CPU (maybe MIPS?) that supported 3 threads per core, and there's tales of IBM Power supporting 4 or 8 TPC, and I think Sun SPARC had chips that supported 8 TPC. Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those! Oops, sorry, wrong forum :)

                "A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants" Chuckles the clown

                Greg UtasG Offline
                Greg UtasG Offline
                Greg Utas
                wrote on last edited by
                #9

                I think how many threads per core are supported is determined by the O/S, not the CPU.

                Robust Services Core | Software Techniques for Lemmings | Articles
                The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.

                <p><a href="https://github.com/GregUtas/robust-services-core/blob/master/README.md">Robust Services Core</a>
                <em>The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.</em></p>

                K 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • Greg UtasG Greg Utas

                  I think how many threads per core are supported is determined by the O/S, not the CPU.

                  Robust Services Core | Software Techniques for Lemmings | Articles
                  The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.

                  K Offline
                  K Offline
                  k5054
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #10

                  I'm thinking in terms of "Hyperthreading", or "Virtual Cores", which is definitely hardware, not software.

                  "A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants" Chuckles the clown

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • K k5054

                    AFAICT, all cores/threads (12/24) on my system get used when doing parallel tasks. And things seem to scale as expected going from 8 to 12, so *my* experience seems refute those claims. Additionally, I would have thought that those that are using AMD ThreadRippers with 32/64 cores would have noticed that they're not getting the expected boost from the huge core count.

                    "A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants" Chuckles the clown

                    raddevusR Offline
                    raddevusR Offline
                    raddevus
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #11

                    I have an AMD® Ryzen 5 2600x six-core processor × 2 (12) core in mine and I notice that all my cores get used also. Running Ubuntu 22.04.3 LTS all seems good.

                    K 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • raddevusR raddevus

                      I have an AMD® Ryzen 5 2600x six-core processor × 2 (12) core in mine and I notice that all my cores get used also. Running Ubuntu 22.04.3 LTS all seems good.

                      K Offline
                      K Offline
                      k5054
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #12

                      Yeah, but see Daniel Pfeffer's reply down-thread. The actual issue has to do with time-slice calculations for the scheduler, not the use of CPU cores/threads. If performance could be better with finer grained calculations for more than 8 cores, it's probably pretty subtle. Like all things, there's probably a point of diminishing returns, and maybe somewhere around 8 cores, scheduling characteristics don't make much difference overall. No doubt someone like the guys over at Phoronix will do some benchmarking with patched kernels and report. Then we'll know what, if anything, we've been missing.

                      "A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants" Chuckles the clown

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • P PIEBALDconsult

                        Eight cores oughta be enough for anybody.

                        D Offline
                        D Offline
                        dandy72
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #13

                        PIEBALDconsult wrote:

                        Eight cores oughta be enough for anybody.

                        Consider (a) the number of cores in an AMD Threadripper CPU (b) the fact that you can use AMD CPUs as space heaters You might want to make use of more cores during those cold winter nights...

                        P 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • Mike HankeyM Mike Hankey

                          Why would anyone need more than 8 codes? :)

                          As the aircraft designer said, "Simplicate and add lightness". PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.3.0 JaxCoder.com Latest Article: SimpleWizardUpdate

                          J Offline
                          J Offline
                          jmaida
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #14

                          The '640K' quote won't go away -- but did Gates really say it? | Computerworld[^]

                          "A little time, a little trouble, your better day" Badfinger

                          Mike HankeyM P 2 Replies Last reply
                          0
                          • D dandy72

                            PIEBALDconsult wrote:

                            Eight cores oughta be enough for anybody.

                            Consider (a) the number of cores in an AMD Threadripper CPU (b) the fact that you can use AMD CPUs as space heaters You might want to make use of more cores during those cold winter nights...

                            P Offline
                            P Offline
                            PIEBALDconsult
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #15

                            Uh huh, here in freaking Phoenix.

                            D 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • J jmaida

                              The '640K' quote won't go away -- but did Gates really say it? | Computerworld[^]

                              "A little time, a little trouble, your better day" Badfinger

                              Mike HankeyM Offline
                              Mike HankeyM Offline
                              Mike Hankey
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #16

                              Interesting article.

                              As the aircraft designer said, "Simplicate and add lightness". PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.3.0 JaxCoder.com Latest Article: SimpleWizardUpdate

                              J 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • Mike HankeyM Mike Hankey

                                Interesting article.

                                As the aircraft designer said, "Simplicate and add lightness". PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.3.0 JaxCoder.com Latest Article: SimpleWizardUpdate

                                J Offline
                                J Offline
                                jmaida
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #17

                                I first heard this quote from my Grad School prof at about the same time frame. We were experimenting with different memory access schemes for RISC processors the hottest CPU design at the time (bit slicing, segmentation, etc. ). Fun times.

                                "A little time, a little trouble, your better day" Badfinger

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • P PIEBALDconsult

                                  Uh huh, here in freaking Phoenix.

                                  D Offline
                                  D Offline
                                  dandy72
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #18

                                  I'm not without sympathy. The *one* time I had an AMD CPU for my primary machine...I remember shutting it down at times because it was just getting too damned hot in summer, despite the AC unit keeping the rest of the house reasonably cool. Nothing wrong with the CPU or heatsink, as I was repeatedly told this was "to be expected" with that particular generation (I forget which exactly). I have no need for a machine that has to be turned off due to the amount of heat it throws off. I've never owned another system with an AMD CPU.

                                  J 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • J jmaida

                                    The '640K' quote won't go away -- but did Gates really say it? | Computerworld[^]

                                    "A little time, a little trouble, your better day" Badfinger

                                    P Offline
                                    P Offline
                                    PIEBALDconsult
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #19

                                    I think he's denied it, but I'm going to keep repeating it anyway. The sentiment still has value, wherever it originated.

                                    T 1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • D dandy72

                                      I'm not without sympathy. The *one* time I had an AMD CPU for my primary machine...I remember shutting it down at times because it was just getting too damned hot in summer, despite the AC unit keeping the rest of the house reasonably cool. Nothing wrong with the CPU or heatsink, as I was repeatedly told this was "to be expected" with that particular generation (I forget which exactly). I have no need for a machine that has to be turned off due to the amount of heat it throws off. I've never owned another system with an AMD CPU.

                                      J Offline
                                      J Offline
                                      jschell
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #20

                                      dandy72 wrote:

                                      because it was just getting too damned hot in summer, despite the AC unit keeping the rest of the house reasonably cool.

                                      That sounds a bit scary. So the CPU was getting so hot that it was warming up the room (not just computer) that you were in to such an extent that you turned it off to get cooler? Sounds more like a fireplace or an oven than the computer.

                                      T D 3 Replies Last reply
                                      0
                                      • J jschell

                                        dandy72 wrote:

                                        because it was just getting too damned hot in summer, despite the AC unit keeping the rest of the house reasonably cool.

                                        That sounds a bit scary. So the CPU was getting so hot that it was warming up the room (not just computer) that you were in to such an extent that you turned it off to get cooler? Sounds more like a fireplace or an oven than the computer.

                                        T Offline
                                        T Offline
                                        trønderen
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #21

                                        The prototypes of the DEC Alpha required a 3 phase power supply. Before the release, they managed to trim down the power requirements so that a plain single-phase PS could handle it. While I was teaching at a tech. college, we got an Alpha machine. Good thing was that it could provide hot lunches for the students :-) (I'm kidding. It was a common joke among the students, though.)

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • J jschell

                                          dandy72 wrote:

                                          because it was just getting too damned hot in summer, despite the AC unit keeping the rest of the house reasonably cool.

                                          That sounds a bit scary. So the CPU was getting so hot that it was warming up the room (not just computer) that you were in to such an extent that you turned it off to get cooler? Sounds more like a fireplace or an oven than the computer.

                                          T Offline
                                          T Offline
                                          trønderen
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #22

                                          jschell wrote:

                                          So the CPU was getting so hot that it was warming up the room (not just computer) that you were in to such an extent that you turned it off to get cooler?

                                          Have you never been working in an environment with, say, 40 servers gathered in a server room? A few years ago, we were moving to another wing of the building. The move was delayed by a couple of months because the machine room needed so much AC that there wasn't enough electric power for it without a significant rewiring, with more circuits of higher rating. A home environment is different, of course. But look at these gaming machines: They have power supplies of 1200 W, 1500 W, ... The three huge screens come on top of that. And the 6 channel times 50 W sound system. It all ends up as heat, similar to a 2000-2500 W electric heater. If you don't need it to keep your house warm (and it certainly is not a very efficient way to heat your house!), you need an AC which can dispose of 2000-2500 W of heat - and the AC unit will give you another 500 W or so of heat (assuming a COP of 4 to 5; they don't go very much higher). If you live in a house built by current insulation standards (as far as I have read, Canada and Norway standards are comparable), then an extra 3000 W of heat may be sufficient to keep your entire house warm even in mid-winter.

                                          J 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups